More Like this

1. CS-Audio: A 16 pJ/b 0.1-15 Mbps Compressive Sensing IC With DWT Sparsifier for Audio-AR

   https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2022.3155366  

   K, Gaurav Kumar ; Chatterjee, Baibhab ; Sen, Shreyas ( March 2022 , IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits)

   With the expansion of sensor nodes to newer avenues of technologies, such as the Internet of things (IoT), internet of bodies (IoB), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality, the demand to support high-speed operations, such as audio and video, with a minimal increase in power consumption is gaining much traction. In this work, we focus on these nodes operating in audio-based AR (AAR) and explore the opportunity of supporting audio at a low power budget. For sensor nodes, communicating one bit of data usually consumes significantly higher power than the power associated with sensing and processing/computing one data bit. Compressing the number of communication bits at the expense of a few computation cycles considerably reduces the overall power consumption of the nodes. Audio codecs such as AAC and LDAC that currently perform compression and decompression of audio streams burn significant power and create a floor to the minimum power possible in these applications. Compressive sensing (CS), a powerful mathematical tool for compression, is often used in physiological signal sensing, such as EEG and ECG, and it can offer a promising low-power alternative to audio codecs. We introduce a new paradigm of using the CS-based approach to realize audio compression that can function as a new independent technique or augment the existing codecs for a higher level of compression. This work, CS-Audio, fabricated in TSMC 65-nm CMOS technology, presents the first CS-based compression, equipped with an ON-chip DWT sparsifier for non-sparse audio signals. The CS design, realized in a pipelined architecture, achieves high data rates and enables a wake-up implementation to bypass computation for insignificant input samples, reducing the power consumption of the hardware. The measurement results demonstrate a 3X-15X reduction in transmitted audio data without a perceivable degradation of audio quality, as indicated by the perceptual evaluation of audio quality mean opinion score (PEAQ MOS) >1.5. The hardware consumes 238 μW power at 0.65 V and 15 Mbps, which is (~20X-40X) lower than audio codecs. 

   more » « less
2. Power-Efficient LFP-Adaptive Dynamic Zoom-and-Track Incremental ΔΣ Front-End for Dual-Band Subcortical Recordings

   https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2023.3298662  

   Oh, Sungjin ; Song, Hyunsoo ; Slager, Nathan ; Ruiz, Jose R. ; Park, Sung-Yun ; Yoon, Euisik ( July 2023 , IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems)

   We report a power-efficient analog front-end integrated circuit (IC) for multi-channel, dual-band subcortical recordings. In order to achieve high-resolution multi-channel recordings with low power consumption, we implemented an incremental ΔΣ ADC (IADC) with a dynamic zoom-and-track scheme. This scheme continuously tracks local field potential (LFP) and adaptively adjusts the input dynamic range (DR) into a zoomed sub-LFP range to resolve tiny action potentials. Thanks to the reduced DR, the oversampling rate of the IADC can be reduced by 64.3% compared to the conventional approach, leading to significant power reduction. In addition, dual-band recording can be easily attained because the scheme continuously tracks LFPs without additional on-chip hardware. A prototype four-channel front-end IC has been fabricated in 180 nm standard CMOS processes. The IADC achieved 11.3-bit ENOB at 6.8 μW, resulting in the best Walden and SNDR FoMs, 107.9 fJ/c-s and 162.1 dB, respectively, among two different comparison groups: the IADCs reported up to date in the state-of-the-art neural recording front-ends; and the recent brain recording ADCs using similar zooming or tracking techniques to this work. The intrinsic dual-band recording feature reduces the post-processing FPGA resources for subcortical signal band separation by >45.8%. The front-end IC with the zoom-and-track IADC showed an NEF of 5.9 with input-referred noise of 8.2 μVrms, sufficient for subcortical recording. The performance of the whole front-end IC was successfully validated through in vivo animal experiments. 

   more » « less
3. A Deep Learning-Based Real-time Seizure Detection System

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB50085.2020.9353623  

   Shawki, N. ; Elseify, T. ; Cap, T. ; Shah, V. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2020 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)

   Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 

   more » « less
4. One-Bit Massive MIMO Precoding for Frequency-Selective Fading Channels

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SSP53291.2023.10207951  

   Nguyen, Ly V. ; Liu, Lu ; Linh-Trung, Nguyen ; Swindlehurst, A. Lee ( July 2023 , Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP))

   One-bit digital-to-analog converters (DACs) are a practical and promising solution for reducing cost and power consumption in massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems. However, the one-bit precoding problem is NP-hard and even more challenging in frequency-selective fading channels compared to the flat-fading scenario. While block-wise processing (BWP) can effectively address the inter-symbol-interference (ISI) in frequency-selective fading channels, its computational complexity and processing delay can be too high for practical implementation. An alternative solution to alleviate the processing complexity and delay issues is symbol-wise processing (SWP) which sequentially designs the transmit signals. However, existing SWP work leaves unwanted interference for later signal designs. In this paper, we propose an SWP approach which can efficiently address the ISI even at the symbol rate. The idea is to design the transmit signal to not only be beneficial for its time slot, but also to provide constructive interference for subsequent symbols. We develop two active ISI processing methods that significantly outperform a conventional approach, one of which that even outperforms the BWP approach at low SNR. 

   more » « less
5. A 2.53 NEF 8-bit 10 kS/s 0.5 μm CMOS Neural Recording Read-Out Circuit with High Linearity for Neuromodulation Implants

   https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10050590  

   Tasneem, Nishat Tarannum ; Mahbub, Ifana ( March 2021 , Electronics)

   This paper presents a power-efficient complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) neural signal-recording read-out circuit for multichannel neuromodulation implants. The system includes a neural amplifier and a successive approximation register analog-to-digital converter (SAR-ADC) for recording and digitizing neural signal data to transmit to a remote receiver. The synthetic neural signal is generated using a LabVIEW myDAQ device and processed through a LabVIEW GUI. The read-out circuit is designed and fabricated in the standard 0.5 μμm CMOS process. The proposed amplifier uses a fully differential two-stage topology with a reconfigurable capacitive-resistive feedback network. The amplifier achieves 49.26 dB and 60.53 dB gain within the frequency bandwidth of 0.57–301 Hz and 0.27–12.9 kHz to record the local field potentials (LFPs) and the action potentials (APs), respectively. The amplifier maintains a noise–power tradeoff by reducing the noise efficiency factor (NEF) to 2.53. The capacitors are manually laid out using the common-centroid placement technique, which increases the linearity of the ADC. The SAR-ADC achieves a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 45.8 dB, with a resolution of 8 bits. The ADC exhibits an effective number of bits of 7.32 at a low sampling rate of 10 ksamples/s. The total power consumption of the chip is 26.02 μμW, which makes it highly suitable for a multi-channel neural signal recording system. 

   more » « less