Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Illustration of a subject participating in the experimental procedure.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

The experimental setup used for simultaneous EEG and NIRS signal acquisition.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

A schematic diagram of the experimental paradigm illustrating the sequence and structure of the experiment.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

The visual screen displaying the scrolling text used during the experiment.

The text flows in one of four directions-right, left, up or down-depending on the task instructions given at the beginning of each trial.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Illustration of EEG electrode positions next to NIRS emitters and detectors.

The EEG electrodes, NIRS detectors and NIRS emitters are represented by blue, purple and green circles, respectively. NIRS channels are represented by black solid lines.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

General flow chart of the proposed method.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 1.

Confusion matrix for multiclass classification.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 7.

Display of subject-specific bar graphs showing average CA as percentages across different modalities.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Average CA Results for 2.4-Second Time Segments: a) Training Set and b) Test Set, representing both single and hybrid modalities in terms of percentage.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Average CA Results for 4.8-Second Time Segments: a) Training Set and b) Test Set, representing both single and hybrid modalities in terms of percentage.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Average CA Results for 12-Second Time Segments: a) Training Set and b) Test Set, representing both single and hybrid modalities in terms of percentage.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Average CA Results for 24-Second Time Segments: a) Training Set and b) Test Set, representing both single and hybrid modalities in terms of percentage.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Table 2.

Average CA for HT, FWHT, BP, and SF-based features extracted from 2.4-second time segments using the k-NN classifier.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Average ca for HT-based features extracted from 2.4-second time segments using classification methods.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

The computational time of feature extraction for a single trial across different time segments.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Studies in the literature are compared to the proposed method.

More »

Table 5 Expand