TY - JOUR
T1 - Objective detection of 40 Hz auditory evoked potentials
T2 - phase coherence vs. magnitude-squared coherence
AU - Dobie, Robert A.
AU - Wilson, Michael J.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by a grant from NIDCD (No. DC00337). Additional support was provided by the National Organization for Hearing Research.
PY - 1994/9
Y1 - 1994/9
N2 - The relative performance of phase coherence (PC) and magnitude-squared coherence (MSC) for detection of steady-state evoked potentials was studied using 40 Hz auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in 10 normal human subjects. In addition, simulation experiments were carried out to determine the effects of signal amplitude and phase variability on detection performance. All simulations showed MSC performance to be better than PC performance, with further improvements when MSC was supplemented with weighted averaging. However, human 40 Hz AEP data showed essentially identical detection performance for PC and MSC, with or without weighted averaging. These data support a "phase aggregation" model (at least near threshold) over the more usual model in which an AEP signal is added to a stationary noise. Human data collected under "no-stimulus" conditions agree well with theoretical distributions for both PC and MSC. For equal test time, long analysis periods (with less averaging) yielded equal performance to short analysis periods (with more averaging), for both PC and MSC.
AB - The relative performance of phase coherence (PC) and magnitude-squared coherence (MSC) for detection of steady-state evoked potentials was studied using 40 Hz auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in 10 normal human subjects. In addition, simulation experiments were carried out to determine the effects of signal amplitude and phase variability on detection performance. All simulations showed MSC performance to be better than PC performance, with further improvements when MSC was supplemented with weighted averaging. However, human 40 Hz AEP data showed essentially identical detection performance for PC and MSC, with or without weighted averaging. These data support a "phase aggregation" model (at least near threshold) over the more usual model in which an AEP signal is added to a stationary noise. Human data collected under "no-stimulus" conditions agree well with theoretical distributions for both PC and MSC. For equal test time, long analysis periods (with less averaging) yielded equal performance to short analysis periods (with more averaging), for both PC and MSC.
KW - Auditory evoked potentials
KW - Magnitude-squared coherence
KW - Phase coherence
KW - Steady-state evoked potentials
KW - Weighted averaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027941415&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027941415&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0168-5597(94)90017-5
DO - 10.1016/0168-5597(94)90017-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 7523084
AN - SCOPUS:0027941415
SN - 0168-5597
VL - 92
SP - 405
EP - 413
JO - Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology - Evoked Potentials
JF - Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology - Evoked Potentials
IS - 5
ER -