|
|
|
| The Difference of Music Processing among Different State of Consciousness: A Study Based on Music Features and EEG Tensor Decomposition |
| Mei Jian1, Wang Xiaoyu2, Liu Yang3, Li Jingqi4, Liu Kehong5, Yang Yong1*, Cong Fengyu2* |
1(School of Automation, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310018, China)
2(School of Biomedical Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, Liaoning, China)
3(Graduate Office, Zhejiang Conservatory of Music, Hangzhou 310024, China)
4(Department of Nerve Rehabilitation, Hangzhou Mingzhou Naokang Rehabilitation Hospital, Hangzhou 310000, China)
5(Department of Rehabilitation, Hangzhou Hospital of Zhejiang Armed Police Corps, Hangzhou 310051, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In this study, we explored the relationship between different levels of consciousness and music processing. We used the EEG data of 43 participants, including 7 normal participants, 17 minimally conscious state (MCS) participants and 19 vegetative state (VS) participants. During the experiment, participants were requested to listen to the traditional folk music “Jasmine”. We extracted tensor components from the EEG by using hierarchical alternating least squares (HALS) non-negative tensor decomposition. After that, we selected components correlated with the five music informatic features (fluctuation centroid, fluctuation entropy, key clarity, pulse clarity and mode) respectively. Then power spectrum ratio analysis and brain topography analysis were applied to the components selected to study the EEG response. The results showed that: 1) differences existed in the proportion of alpha waves of the EEG response to the 5 music features among the normal group, the MCS group and the VS group: fluctuation centroid (normal group 0.687±0.193, MCS group 0.033±0.022, VS group 0.063±0.040, P<0.001), fluctuation entropy (normal group 0.588±0.132, MCS group 0.041±0.025, VS group 0.085±0.077, P<0.001), key clarity (normal group 0.668±0.295, MCS group 0.096±0.103, VS group 0.057±0.065, P<0.001), pulse clarity (normal group 0.672±0.064, MCS group 0.144±0.242, VS group 0.044±0.044, P<0.001), mode (normal group 0.432±0.273, MCS group 0.057±0.049, VS group 0.033±0.026, P<0.001).Except feature mode, beta wave of the EEG response to the rest 4 music features have the same statistical results as alpha wave (P＜0.05). 2) The rhythm of the response of MCS group and VS group to the 5 music features was mainly the slow wave of delta wave and theta wave. 3) As for the EEG activation area, the normal group EEG response to the 5 music features mainly distributed in frontal lobe but the MCS and VS group EEG response mainlyin parietal lobe. The results showed that the level of consciousness had effects on brain processing music feature, which provided a new research paradigm for exploring the relation between level of consciousness and music processing.
|
|
Received: 10 October 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] Koelsch S. Toward a neural basis of music perception-A review and updated model [J]. Frontier in Psychology, 2011, 2: 110.
[2] Schwenzer M, Mathiak K. Numeric aspects in pitch identification: An fMRI study [J]. BMC Neuroscience, 2011, 12: 26.
[3] 赵怀阳,江俊,周临舒,等. 人类镜像系统参与音乐情绪的自动加工: 来自EEG的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(7): 795-804.
[4] Piccirilli M, Sciarma T, Luzzi S. Modularity of music: Evidence from a case of pure amusia [J]. Journal of Neurology, 2000, 69(4): 541-545.
[5] OKelly J, James L, Palaniappan R, et al. Neurophysiological and behavioral responses to music therapy in vegetative and minimally conscious states [J]. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2013,7: 884.
[6] Boly M, Garrido MI, Gosseries O, et al. Preserved feedforward but impaired top-down processes in the vegetative state [J]. Science, 2011, 332(6031): 858-862.
[7] Crone JS, Ladurner G, Holler Y, et al. Deactivation of the default mode network as a marker of impaired consciousness: An fMRI study [J]. PLoS ONE, 2011, 6(10): e26373.
[8] Cong F, Phan A H, Zhao Q, et al. Analysis of ongoing EEG elicited by natural music stimuli using nonnegative tensor factorization[C]//2012 Proceedings of the 20th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO). Bucharest: IEEE, 2012: 494-498.
[9] Cichocki A, Zdunek R, Phan AH, et al. Multi-way array (tensor) factorizations and decompositions [M]//Nonnegative Matrix and Tensor Factorizations: Applications to Exploratory Multi-Way Data Analysis and Blind Source Separation. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2009: 337-432.
[10] Cong F, Lin Q, Kuang L, et al. Tensor decomposition of EEG signals: A brief review [J]. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 2015, 248: 59-69.
[11] Wang D, Cong F, Zhao Q, et al. Exploiting ongoing EEG with multilinear partial least squares during free-listening to music [C]// 2016 IEEE 26th International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing (MLSP). Vietrisul Mare: IEEE, 2016: 1-6.
[12] Zhao Q, Caiafa CF, Mandic D, et al. Multilinear subspace regression: An orthogonal tensor decomposition approach [J]. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2011, 24: 1269-1277.
[13] Alluri V, Toiviainen P, Jääskeläinen IP, et al. Large-scale brain networks emerge from dynamic processing of musical timbre, key and rhythm [J]. NeuroImage, 2012, 59(4): 3677-3689.
[14] Urbenjaphol P, Jitpanya C, Khaoropthum S. Effects of the sensory stimulation program on recovery in unconscious patients with traumatic brain injury[J]. Journal of Neuroscience Nursing, 2009, 41(3): E10-E16.
[15] Lartillot O, Toiviainen P. MIR in matlab (II): A toolbox for musical feature extraction from audio [C]// The 8th International Conference on Music Information Retrieval. Vienna: ISMIR, 2007: 237-244.
[16] Cong F, Alluri V, Nandi AK, et al. Linking brain responses to naturalistic music through analysis of ongoing EEG and stimulus features [J]. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2013, 15(5): 1060-1069.
[17] Cichocki A, Lee N, Oseledets I, et al. Tensor networks for dimensionality reduction and large-scale optimization: Part 2 applications and future perspectives [J]. Foundations & Trends in Machine Learning, 2017, 9(6): 249-429.
[18] Phan AH, Cichocki A. Multi-way nonnegative tensor factorization using fast hierarchical alternating least squares algorithm (HALS) [C]// The 2008 International Symposium on Nonlinear Theory and its Applications. Budapest: IEICE, 2008: 41-44.
[19] Wang D, Zhu Y, Ristaniemi T, et al. Extracting multi-mode ERP features using fifth-order nonnegative tensor decomposition [J]. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 2018, 308: 240-247.
[20] Arnaud D, Jason P, Julie O, et al. Independent EEG sources are dipolar [J]. PLoS ONE, 2012,7(2):e30135.
[21] Fernández T, Harmony T, Rodríguez M, et al. EEG activation patterns during the performance of tasks involving different components of mental calculation[J]. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1995, 94(3):175-182.
[22] 赖寒,徐苗,宋宜颖,等. 音乐知觉的神经基础:脑成像研究的元分析[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(5): 491-507. |
| [1] |
Wu Ruoyou, Wang Dexing, Yuan Hongchun, Gong Peng, Qin Enqian. Attention State Detection Based on Feature Encoding and Convolutional Neural Networks[J]. Chinese Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2020, 39(6): 759-763. |
| [2] |
Shen Lei, Geng Xinyi, Wang Shouyan. Epileptic States Recognition using Transfer Learning and Dilated CNN[J]. Chinese Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2020, 39(6): 700-710. |
|
|
|
|
