Genetic Algorithm Optimization of Fuzzy Outputs for Classification

of Epilepsy Risk Levels from EEG Signals

R Harikumar, Non-member
Dr (Mrs) R Sukanesh, Non-member
P A Bharathi, Non-member
This paper aims to optimize the output of epilepsy activity namely electro encephalogram (EEG) signal by Fuzzy Logic
techniques using Genetic Algorithms (GA). The fuzzy techniques are applied to classify the levels of epilepsy based on
extracted parameters like energy, variance, peaks, sharp and spike waves, duration, events and covariance obtained
from the EEG of the patient. A Binary GA and Continuous GA are then applied on the classified data to obtain the
optimized risk level that characterizes the patients epilepsy risk level. The performance index (PI) and quality value
(QV) are calculated for both method. A group of eight patients with known epilepsy findings are used for this study.
High PI, such as, 92% (BGA) and 96% (CGA) were obtained at QVs of 80% and 90%, respectively. It is found that the
Continuous Genetic Algorithm provides a good tool for optimizing the epilepsy risk levels.
Keywords: EEG signals; Epilepsy; Fuzzy logic; Genetic algorithms; Risk levels

INTRODUCTION
The Electro encephalogram (EEG) is a measure of the
cumulative firing of neurons in various parts of the brain. It
contains information regarding changes in the electrical
potential of the brain obtained from a set of recording
electrodes. These data include the characteristic waveforms
with accompanying variations in amplitude, frequency, phase
etc, as well as brief occurrence of electrical patterns, such as,
spindles, sharps and spike waveforms. EEG patterns have
shown to be modified by a wide range of variables including
biochemical, metabolic, circulatory, hormonal, neuroelectric
and behavioral factors1. In the past, the encephalographer, by
visual inspection was able to qualitatively distinguish normal
EEG activity from localized or generalized abnormalities
contained within relatively long EEG records. The most
important activity possibly detected from the EEG is the
epilepsy2. Epilepsy is characterized by uncontrolled excessive
activity or potential discharge by either a part or all of the
central nervous system. The different types of epileptic
seizures are characterized by different EEG waveform
patterns. With real-time monitoring to detect epileptic
seizures gaining widespread recognition, the advent of
computers has made it possible to effectively apply a host of
methods to quantify the changes occurring based on the EEG
signals3. One of them is a classification of risk level of epilepsy
by using fuzzy techniques4. In this paper, two techniques have
been discussed viz. Binary Genetic Algorithm and
Continuous Genetic Algorithm to optimize the epileptic risk
R Harikumar and Dr (Mrs) R Sukanesh are with Department of ECE,
Thiagrajar College of Enginering, Maduari and P A Bharathi is with
Department of ECE, Amrita Institute of Technology, Coimbatore, 641 105.
This paper was received on June 29, 2004. Written discussion on this paper will
be received till July 31, 2005.

Vol 86, May 2005

level of the patient classified by the fuzzy system5. A

comparison of these two methods based on their performance
indices and quality values are also presentend.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
EEG from 16 channels is recorded using the standard 10-20
electrode system. In this paper the recorded EEG is used to
analyze for artefacts. Since the EEG records is over a
continuous duration of about 30 s, they are divided into
epochs of 2 s duration each by scanning into a bitmap image of
size 400 pixels 100 pixels. A 2 s epoch is long enough to
detect any significant changes in activity and presence of
artefacts and also short enough to avoid any repetition or
redundancy in the signal6-8.
The EEG signal has a maximum frequency of 50 Hz and so,
each epoch is sampled at a frequency of 200 Hz using graphics
programming in C. Each sample corresponds to the
instantaneous amplitude values of the signal, totaling 400
values for an epoch. The different parameters used for
quantification of the EEG are computed using these amplitude
values by suitable programming codes. The parameters are
obtained for three different epochs at discrete times in order to
locate variations and differences in the epileptic activity.
Basic Fuzzy System
Fuzzy set theory provides effective tools to handle and
manipulate imprecise and noisy data and make decisions based
on such data. Further it offers a linguistic approach that
represents an excellent approximation to medical texts apart
from providing reasoning methods capable of making
approximate inferences. Adlassing, et al 6 did a complete
diagnosis system based on fuzzy theory by constructing fuzzy
9

Parameters

Fuzzifier

Inference
engine

Defuzzification

GA optimization
Samples
Knowledge base

Output
Raw EEG
signals

Figure 1 Fuzzy classification system

relations from the frequency of occurrence of symptoms and

diseases. One such system9-10 is shown in Figure 1. This is
accomplished as:

2
( xi )

(1) Fuzzy classification for epilepsy risk level at each

channel from EEG signals and its parameters.

xi

i =1

(2) Each channel results are optimized, since they are at

different risk levels.

where =

(3) Performance of fuzzy

optimization is analyzed.

Average Duration

classification

after

the

The various parameters obtained by sampling are given as

inputs to the fuzzy system as shown in Figure 1. The
parameters derived from EEG signals are8,11,12..
Energy of the Epoch
The energy in each two-second epoch is given by
n

E = xi2

is the average amplitude of the epoch.

The average duration is given by

p

D=

ti

i =1

(3)

where ti is one peak to peak duration and p is the number of

such durations.
(1)

i =1

(2)

i =1

2 =

where xi is signal sample value and n is number of samples.

The normalized energy is taken by dividing the energy term
by 1000.
Peaks
The total number of positive and negative peaks exceeding a
threshold is found.

Covariance of Duration
The variation of the average duration is defined by
p

CD =

2
( D ti )

i =1

pD 2

(4)

The total numbers of spike and sharp waves in an epoch are

recorded as events.

Fuzzy Membership Functions

The energy is compared with the other six input features to
give six outputs. Each input feature is classified into five fuzzy
linguistic levels viz, very low, low, medium, high and very
high14. The triangular membership functions are used for the
linguistic levels of energy, peaks and variance as shown in
Figure 2. Similar functions for other input variables namely
events, spike and sharp waves, average duration and
covariance of duration are defined. The output risk level is
classified into five linguistic levels namely normal, low,
medium, high and very high.

Variance

Fuzzy Rule Set

Spikes and Sharps

Spikes are detected when the zero crossing duration of
predominantly high amplitude peaks in the EEG waveform
lies between 20 ms and 70 ms and sharp waves are detected
when the duration lies between 70 ms and 200 ms.
Events

The variance is computed as given

10

by13,14

Rules are framed in the format.

IE (I) JournalID

Membership
function
Membership
function
Membership
function
Membership
function

Very low

low

Medium

High

Very high

0.5
0

0.7

1 Very low

2.9
low

3.6

7.6
8.2
9.2 11
Energy input function
Medium

High

30

Very high

0.5
0

0.15 0.3 0.4

Very low

low

0.45 1.6
2.2 3.8
Varience input function
Medium

High

4.3

6.4

Very high

0.5
0

1 Very low

3
low

4
6
8
12
Peak input function
Medium
High

16

20

Very high

0.5
0

4
6
8
12
Output risk level Function

16

20

Figure 2 Fuzzy membership functions

If Energy is Low and Variance is Low then Output Risk Level

is Low
In this fuzzy system there are five linguistic levels of energy
and five linguistic levels of other six features, such as, variance,
peaks, events, spike and sharp waves, average duration and
covariance of duration. A total rule base of 150 rules based on
six sets of 25 rules each is obtained. This is a type of exhaustive
fuzzy rule based system15.
The proposed fuzzy system in trained with a simulation of
input and the output variables are studied. Each fuzzy set
variable will have nine inputs under one category. There are
five sets, such as, very low, low, medium, high, very high.
Therefore forty five test inputs are simulated for each input
like energy, variance4,16. The outputs are analyzed and the
deviation in the classification of the output risk levels is shown
in the corresponding error matrix of energy versus the
respective input function.
Error Matrix
The deviation of the output from the normalized form for the
test input conditions are computed as error matrices. The case
of no error is indicated by the zero values in the matrix. Any
fractional values indicate the presence of error. For example,
the matrix of energy against variance shows no errors in the
cases VL * VL, VL * L, L * VL, L * L, L * M and VH * VH.
Single error patters appear in cases L * M, M * M, H * H,
H * VH and VH * H while two error patters appear in cases
M * H and H * M. This is shown in the error
Vol 86, May 2005

Epoch 1

Epoch 2

Epoch 3

WYYWYY
YZZYXX
YYZXYY
YZZYXY

WYYWYY
YYYYXX
YYYYYY
XYYXYY

WZYYWW
YYYXYY
YYYYYY
YYYYYY

ZZZYYY
YYZXXX
ZZZYYY
YYYYXX

WYYYXX
WYZYYY
YYYYYY
YYYYXX

YYYXYY
YZZYYY
ZZZYYY
YYYXZY

Figure 3 Fuzzy logic output

F0
GG 0
matrix E1 = G 1 / 9
GG
GG 2 / 9
H 1/ 9

0
0
1/ 9
1/ 9
0

I
J
0 J
2 / 9J
J
1 / 9J
J
JK

A sample output of the fuzzy system with actual patient

readings is shown in Figure 3 for eight channels over three
epochs. It can be seen that the Channel 1 shows low risk levels
while Channel 7 shows high risk levels. Also, the risk level
classification varies between adjacent epochs. Hence,
optimization of the fuzzy results is done to arrive at a better
risk level for each patient17.
GENETIC ALGORITHM OPTIMIZATION
The Genetic Algorithm is a type of natural evolutionary
algorithm that models biological process to optimize highly
complex cost functions by allowing a population composed of
many individuals to evolve under specific rules to a state that
maximizes the fitness. John Holland18 developed this method
in 1975. Many researchers share the intuitions that if the space
to be searched is large, is known not to be perfectly smooth
and unimodal (ie, consists of a single smooth hill), or is not
well understood, or if the fitness function is noisy, and if the
task does not require a global optimum to be found, ie, if
quickly finding a sufficiently good solution is enough a GA
will have a good chance off being competitive with or
surpassing other weak methods19.
Clearly the advantages of using a genetic algorithm for
optimization over other methods are overwhelming. A simple
genetic algorithm can be summed up in seven steps as follows:
(1) Start with a randomly generated population of n
chromosomes.
(2) Calculate fitness of each chromosome.
(3) Select a pair of parent chromosomes from the initial
population.
(4) With a probability Pcross (the crossover probability of
the crossover rate), perform crossover to produce
two offspring.
11

Define Parameters
Fitness function
Fitness

Represent parameters

Create population

Evaluate cost

Crossover

Mutate

Test

Stop
Figure 4 Basic genetic algorithm

Table 1
Risk
Level

Representation

Binary
String

Weight

Probability

Very
High

10000

16/31 = 0.516129

0.086021

High

01000

8/31 = 0.258065

0.043011

Medium

00100

4/31 = 0.129032

0.021505

Low

00010

2/31 = 0.064516

0.010752

Normal

00001

1/31 = 0.032258

0.005376

11111 = 31

=1

the individual genes. For example, if the output of an epoch is

encoded as ZZYXWZ, its fitness would be 0.333331.
Operation on Data
Using the above representation, a genetic algorithm has been
developed that optimizes the output of the fuzzy system and
gives four risk level patterns in the five categories for each
patient. This is obtained by the following procedure:
l

Open three files having 16 strings each and process

stage 1.

Divide into sets of 4 strings and iterate.

(5) Mutate the two offspring with a probability Pmut (the

mutation probability).

(1) Maximum of 64 generations.

(2) Two strings selected randomly.

(6) Replace the offspring in the population.

(3) Single point crossover after 3rd position with

probability Pcross = 0.75.

(7) Check for termination or go to step 2.

Each iteration of the above steps is called a generation. The
termination condition is usually a fixed number of generations
typically anywhere from 50 to 500 or more. Under certain
other circumstances, a check for global minimum is done after
each generation and the algorithm is terminated as and when it
is reached20. The algorithm explained above is illustrated as a
flowchart in the Figure 4.
BINARY GENETIC ALGORITHM
The binary genetic algorithm (BGA) is a type of genetic
algorithm that works with a finite parameter space. This
characteristic makes it ideal in optimizing a cost due to
parameters that assume only finite number of values. In case of
optimizing parameters that are continuous, quantization is
applied20. The chief aspect of this method is the representation
of the parameter as strings of binary digits of 0 and 1. This
composition allows simple crossover and mutation function
that can operate on the chromosomes.
Binary Representation
The five risk levels are encoded as Z > Y > X > W > U in
binary strings of length five bits using weighted positional
representation as shown in Table 1. Encoding each output risk
level of the fuzzy output gives us a string of six chromosomes,
the fitness of which is calculated as the sum of probabilities of
12

Binary representation of risk levels

(4) Random mutation of any position to any state in

the offspring with lower fitness and probability
Pmut = 0.129032 which is the probability of
XXXXXX.
(5) Best two strings with higher fitness get selected for
next stage.
l

Stage 2 operates on 24 chromosomes with 8 from each

epoch.

Divide into sets of 4 strings and iterate in same way as

stage 1.

Output of stage 2 is 4 best strings in each epoch.

Final stage is row-wise optimization in which each

row of the epochs are iterated and one best output is
taken.

Last iteration involving string of each row gives the

final 4 output strings.

By the application of the above procedure, the 48 risk level

patterns obtained by the fuzzy logic classifier are reduced to
4 risk level patterns, which define that of the patient. This
process for a single patient is shown in Table 2. As seen from
the Table 2, each epoch is first reduced to 4 strings, which give
the optimized risk levels of the epoch. An operation on the
IE (I) JournalID

Table 2

Optimization by binary genetic algorithm

EPOCH 1

algorithm, which can be used in manipulating these real

valued data. In a similar sense, the output of the fuzzy system
is also a real number in the 0 to 20 scale with a precision of 4
digits after decimal point. Instead of encoding the fuzzy
output in the form of strings and converting them to bit
representation, the values can be directly used in a continuous
parameter genetic algorithm (CGA) to obtain more precise
outputs21.

Initial

Intermediate

Best Four

YYYYXX

YYYXXY

YYYYYY

ZYYYZZ

YYYZZY

YYYYYY

ZYYZXX

YYYYYY

YYYZYZ

YYYYYY

ZZYXYY

ZYYZYZ

ZZYZYZ

YYYXZZ

YYYZZY

YYYXYY

YYYYYZ

YYYXZZ

YYYYYY

YYYYYY

YYYYYZ

YYYXYY

YYYYYX

YYYXYY

XYYYWX

YYYYYY

YYYYYY

Parent1 = C 11 , C 12 , C 13 , C 14 , C 15 , C 16

YYYYYY

Parent 2 = C 21 , C 22 , C 23 , C 24 , C 25 , C 26

FINAL STAGE

Epoch 1

Epoch 2

Epoch 3

Final 4

ZYYZYZ

ZYYZZZ

ZZYZYZ

ZZYZZZ

YYYZZY

YYYZZZ

YYYZZZ

YYYZZZ

YYYXZZ

ZZYXZZ

YYYZZZ

ZYYWWZ

YYYYYZ

ZZYYXZ

ZZYYYY

ZZYYWW

12 strings in the final stage by a row-wise optimization gives

the final 4 strings, representing the risk levels of the patient.
The drawback in this optimization as evident from the Table 2
is that even though there are lower risk level states in the
intermediate stage, they get omitted while proceeding to the
final stage. This is because the algorithm takes only the higher
fitness strings, which are the strings that represent the higher
risk levels. Since, only known cases of epilepsy are dealt with
it can be stated that this is not a disadvantage, as those states
will result in false alarms, which are defined later. It can also
be inferred from the above table that the mutation taking place
in the initial stages affect the final result in only a small extent.
Also, the final four strings which are obtained as the risk levels
of the patient matches with the initial strings to a large extent.
These advantages of the algorithm outline its use for the
optimization of the risk levels of epilepsy.
Most values is the real world are neither integers nor in
encoded form. They appear as real values and the
advancement in computing has enabled us in realizing these
values to a high precision. Hence, there is requirement of an
Vol 86, May 2005

The iterations in a continuous parameter genetic algorithm

follow the footsteps of its predecessor. The difference in the
continuous parameter genetic algorithm occurs in the
computation of the fitness function and the crossover and
mutation operators. The following section elucidates as to
how the operators in a continuous parameter genetic
algorithm differ from a conventional binary genetic
algorithm.
Crossover
A single point crossover with a random generation of
crossover point from the 2nd to the 5th position is followed.
As the iteration involves real numbers, a different method for
crossover is followed which is illustrated below using
symbols.

Offspring 1 = C 11 , C 12 , C 13 , C x 4 , C x5 , C x 6
Offspring 2 = C 21 , C 22 , C 23 , C y 4 , C y 5 , C y 6

where
C Xn = C 1n + ( 1 ) C 2 n
C Yn = C 2 n + ( 1 ) C 1n
= random number in [0, 1]

The level of crossover varies with the value of . For = 1 ,

there is no crossover and for = 0 , there is a complete
crossover. For fractional values of , there is corresponding
change in the two strings.
Mutation
A random point mutation is done by selecting one of the
chromosomes and changing its gene to a value in [0, 20] which
is the output risk level of the fuzzy system. This mutation
occurs only if a random number generated is less than the
probability of mutation, which is fixed at 4%.
Operation
The operation of the continuous genetic algorithm is similar
to that of the binary counterpart, with the modified crossover
and mutation operators. In this mode, the sixteen channels of
each epoch are run for 128 generations and the four
chromosomes with the highest fitness values are passed on to
13

Table 3

Optimization by continuous genetic algorithm

Table 4

Intermediate Result of Epoch 1

Performance index

Methods

10.1911

8.8967

10.0000

10.0000

4.9558

4.9558

11.0717

9.1946

10.0000

5.5000

5.5000

11.0000

11.0000

10.9620

10.0000

10.0000

10.0000

10.0000

15.0678

13.1178

10.0000

11.0000

16.0000

16.0000

Intermediate Results of Epoch 3

Perfect
Classification

Missed
Classification

False
Alarm

Performance
Index

Fuzzy logic

50.00

20

10.00

40.00

BGA optimization

91.67

8.33

95.45

CGA optimization

97.92

2.08

97.87

16.0352

11.8384

13.0688

11.1024

11.9311

12.2006

11.9984

8.0195

18.0000

12.0000

14.8507

7.6978

5.0000

10.3781

11.7473

18.0000

14.7012

10.9742

10.6840

12.9038

9.0000

4.8421

16.8188

12.7893

where PC is the Perfect Classification; MC; Missed

Classification; and FA; False Alarm.
A missed classification occurs when a high level is represented
as low level. False alarm occurs when low level is represented
as high level. A sample of Performance Index for a known
epilepsy data set at maximum value is shown in Table 4.

Final Result
10.4055

15.8516

12.2654

13.5894

11.4648

11.3068

7.5007

12.1747

15.0000

14.8354

10.9534

12.6932

9.0000

12.3859

11.3762

14.7118

17.0000

8.2202

7.0000

13.4603

10.9560

14.5240

10.0926

16.0000

Encoded Result
YZYYYY
YYZZYY
YYYZZY
YYYZYZ

the next stage where they compete with four other similar
chromosomes from two other epochs. The best twelve
chromosomes from the three epochs are iterated for another
128 generations and the final four chromosomes are used as the
representation of the patients epileptic risk level. For ease of
assessment and quantification, these results are also encoded
using the scheme discussed earlier. The Table 3 gives a detailed
analysis of the Continuous Genetic Algorithm operation. As
can be seen from Table 3, the continuous genetic algorithm
gives a more precise risk level classification than the binary
GA. This is evident from the encoded risk levels of the CGA
as compared to that of the BGA results for the same patient.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The outputs are obtained for three epochs for every patient in
classifying the epileptic risk level by the fuzzy genetic algorithm approach. To study the relative performance of these
two systems, two parameters, the Performance Index and the
Quality Value are measured. These parameters are calculated
for each set of the patient and compared.
Performance Index
The PI calculated for the aforesaid classification methods are
illustrated in Table 4 using (5). The performance index of a
system is defined by11
14

PI =

PC MC FA
100
PC

(5)

It is evident that the optimizations give a better performance

than the fuzzy techniques because of its lower false alarms and
missed classifications.
Quality Value
The goal of this project is to classify the epileptic risk level
with as many perfect classifications and as few false alarms as
possible. In order to compare different classifier a measure is
required that reflects the overall quality of the classifier. Their
quality is determined by three factors.
(i)

Classification rate

(ii) Classification delay

(iii) False Alarm rate
The quality value QV is defined as
QV =

eR

fa

j e

+ 0.2 T dly Pdct + 6 Pmsd

(6)

where, C is the scaling constant, R fa , the number of false

alarm per set, T dly, the average delay of the on set classification
in seconds, Pdct , the percentage of perfect classification and
Pmsd is the percentage of perfect risk level missed.
Several reasons justify the use of this formula.
(i)

Q v monotonically increases where Rfa decreases. The

lower the false alarm rate is better the classifier
performance.

(ii) The constant false alarm of 0.2 per set is added to Rfa
in the Qv formula. In the present method, the false
alarm rate is low and usually ranges form 0 0.5. A
rate higher than 0.5 is unacceptable.
IE (I) JournalID

Quality value

25
20
15
10
5
0
1

3
1234
1234
1234
1234

Binary genetic algorithm

Results of classifiers taken as average of all eight patients

Parameters

Fuzzy Method
Before
Optimization

Risk level
classification
rate, %

Binary Genetic
Algorithm

Continuous
Genetic
Algorithm

50.00

93.2200

97.1300

Weighted
delay, s

4.00

0.4990

0.4400

False-alarm,
rate/set

0.20

0.0677

0.0286

Performance
index, %

40.00

92.6800

96.9800

Quality value

6.25

20.1400

22.6800

Percentage, Qv

25.00

80.6000

90.7000

Cotinuous genetic algorithm

for missed risk level by the method. The weights for

the average delay of classification or missed risk level
or the percentages of perfectly classified and missed
risk levels consequently the weighted average delay
reflects the quality of a classifier with respect to the
classification delay.

Figure 5 Quality value of eight data sets

Table 5

Patient data sets

(iv) As a result of (iii), Qv is inversely proportional to the

weighted average of the delay of onset classification.
This reflects the fact that the shorter the onset
classification delays the better the classifier.
(v) Theoretically, the weighted delay, Tdly Pdct + 6 Pmsd
could be zero if no level is missed (Pmsd is zero) and all
classification delays Tdly are zero. However, this
cannot happen because Tdly can never be zero. In order
to classify a perfect risk level with the shortest
possible delay, the classification window, which
lasts 2.0 s. As a result, the weighted delay
Tdly Pdct + 6 Pmsd cannot be very small.

(iii) Tdly Pdct + 6 Pmsd is actually the weighted average

of the delay of onset classification while Tdly is the
average delay of on set classification is used as a delay

A constant C is empirically set to 10 because this scale is the

value of Qv to an easy reading range. The higher value of Qv,
the better the classifier among the different classifier, the

Percentage (%)

100
80
60
40
20
0
Fuzzy method
before
optimization

Binary
genetic algorithm
optimization

Continuous
genetic algorithm
optimization

Figure 6 Comparison of various optimization techniques

Vol 86, May 2005

15

classifier with the highest Qv should be the best. The quality

value obtained by fuzzy logic method classification and
optimization techniques are shown in the Figure 5.
From the Figure 5, it can be observed that the continuous
genetic algorithm has a better quality value than the binary
coded genetic algorithm. In case of the data set 3, the continuous genetic algorithm has a lower quality value than the binary
coded genetic algorithm. This is because the patient reading
was taken after medication was given. This has caused a
lowering of the risk level and so the occurrence of false alarms
adversely affects the performance and quality value of the
system.
Comparison of Optimization Results
The two different approaches give different results. Hence, a
comparative study is needed whereby the advantages of one
over the other can be easily validated and the best method
found out. A study of Fuzzy Logic without optimization and
two types of Genetic Algorithm optimizations were studied
and their results taken as the average of all eight known
patients is tabulated in Table 5 and illustrated in Figure 6.
CONCLUSION
This paper aims at classifying the epilepsy risk level of epliepetic patients from EEG signals. The parameters derived from
the EEG signal are stored as data sets. Then the fuzzy
technique is used to obtain the risk level from each epoch at
every EEG channel. The goal was to classify perfect risk levels
with high rate or classification, a short delay from onset, and a
low false alarm rate. Though it is impossible to obtain a perfect
performance in all these conditions, some compromises have
been made. As a high false alarm rate ruins the effectiveness of
the system, a low false-alarm rate is most important. Genetic
algorithm optimization techniques are used to optimize the
risk level by incorporating the above goals. The spatial region
of normal EEG is easily identified in this classification
method. The major limitation of this method is that if one
channel has a high-risk level, then the entire group will be
maximized to that risk level. This will affect the non-epilepsy
spike region in the groups. The classification rate of epilepsy
risk level of above 90% is possible in our method. The missed
classification is almost 0% for a short delay of 2 s. The number
of cases from the present 8 patients has to be increased for
better testing of the system. From this method the occurrence
of high-risk level frequency and the possible medication to the
patients can be infered. Also optimizing each regions data
separately can solve the focal epilepsy problem. The
comparison of genetic algorithm optimization with that based
on aggregation operators has to be studied. The front-end
optimization, in which, the inputs are first optimized by
genetic algorithms before being classified by fuzzy system
with a reduced rule base to get a singleton output for the risk
level can be studied. The risk level classification of diabetic
epileptic patients to non-diabetic patients may also be taken as
further extension of this paper.
16

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors owe their sincere gratitude to Ms Beena
Venugopal, Final year BE (ECE) student of Amrita Institute of
Technology for her timely help and valuable inputs. The
authors thank the Principal, Head of Department of ECE and
Management of Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai
and Amrita Institute of Technology, Coimbatore for
providing excellent computing facilities and encouragement.
The authours are grateful to Dr Asokan, Neurologist,
Ramakrishna hospital Coimbatore and Dr B Rajalakshmi,
Diabetologist, Government Hospital Dindigul for providing
the EEG signals.
REFERENCES
1. D N Dutt and B K Anantaraman. Artefact Detection in EEG Signals using
Phase-space Based Joint PDF Technique. Proceedings of NCBME, MIT Manipal,
April 1998, pp 11.53-11.55.
2. A C Gayton. Text Book of Medical Physiology. Prism Books Pvt Ltd,
Bangalore, 9th Edition, 1996.
3. S Park, et al. TDAT Domain Analysis Tool for EEG Analysis. IEEE
Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol 37, no 8, August 1990, pp 803-811.
4. R Harikumar and B S Narayanan. Fuzzy Techniques for Classification of
Epilepsy Risk Level from EEG Signals. Proceedings of IEEE Tencon 2003,
Bangalore, India, October 14-17, 2003, pp 209-213.
5. M Russo. FuGeNeSys A Fuzzy Genetic Neural System for Fuzzy
Modelling. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol 6, no 3, August 1998,
pp 373-387.
6. K P Adlassing. Fuzzy Set Theory in Medical Diagnosis. IEEE Transactions
on Systems Man Cybernetics, vol 16, March 1986, pp 260-265.
7. A A Dingle, et al. A Multistage System to Detect Epileptic form Activity in
the EEG. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol 40, no 12, December
1993, pp 1260-1268.
8. M Van Gils, et al. Signal Processing in Prolonged EEG Recordings during
Intensive Care. IEEE EMB Magazine, vol 16, no 6, November/December 1997,
pp 56-63.
9. H Watanabe, et al. Application of a Fuzzy Discrimination Analysis for
Diagnosis of Valvular Heart Disease. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol 2,
no 4, November 1994, pp 267-276.
10. D L Hudson. Fuzzy Logic in Medical Expert Systems. IEEE EMB
Magazine, vol 13, no 6, November/December 1994, pp 693-698.
11. L Duckstein, et al. Fuzzy Classification of Patients State with Applications
to Electro Diagnosis of Peripheral Neuropathy. IEEE Transactions on
Biomedical Engineering, vol 42, no 8, August 1995, pp 786-791.
12. R Neelaveni and G Gurusamy. EEG Signal Analysis Methods A
Review. Proceedings of National System Conference, 1998, pp 355-361.
13. P A Bharathi and V Beena. Analysis of Statistical Tests and Fuzzy
Techniques in Diagnosis of Epilepsy from EEG Signals. Proceedings of ICSCI
2004, Hyderabad, February 12-15, 2004, pp 131-137.
14. R Harikumar, et al. Epilepsy Detection from EEG Signals A Statistical
Approach. Proceedings of ICECON 2003, NIT Trichy, December 5-6, 2003.

IE (I) JournalID

15. C B Gupta and V Gupta. An Introduction to Statistical Methods. 22nd

Editions, Vikas Publishing House Ltd, 2001.
16. J G Marin-Blzquez and Qiangshen. From Approximate to Descriptive
Fuzzy Classifiers. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol 10, no 4, August
2002, pp 484-497.

20. C-H Wang, et al. Integrating Fuzzy Knowledge by Genetic Algorithms.

IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computations, vol 2, no 4, November 1998,
pp 138-149.
21. R L Haupt and S E Haupt. Practical Genetic Algorithms. John Wisely and
Sons, 1998.

17. Yuhui Shi, et al. Implementation of Evolutionary Fuzzy Systems. IEEE

Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol 7, no 2, April 1999, pp 109-119.

22. Haoqu and Jean Gotman. A Patient Specific Algorithm for Detection
Onset in Long-term EEG Monitoring-possible use as Warning Device. IEEE
Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol 44, no 2, February 1997, pp 115-122.

18. D E Goldberg. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine

Learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1989.

23. K F Man, et al. Genetic Algorithms: Concepts and Applications. IEEE

Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol 43, no 5, October 1996, pp 519-533.

19. M Mitchell. An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. A Bardford Book MIT

Press, 1997.

24. R Harikumar and S Selvan. Fuzzy Based Diagnosis of Epilepsy from EEG
Signals. Proceedings of the NCSSS 2002, PSG Tech Coimbatore, March 2002.

Statement about ownership and other particulars about the Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India)
(to be published on the first issue every year after the last day of February)
FORM IV
(See Rule 8 of the Registration of Newspapers)
(Central Rules 1956)
1.

Place of publication

8 Gokhale Road, Kolkata 700 020

2.

Periodicity of its publication

Monthly

3.

Printer's name
Nationality
Address

Cdr A K Poothia, IN (Retd)

Indian
8 Gokhale Road, Kolkata 700 020

4.

Editor's name
Nationality
Address

Cdr A K Poothia, IN (Retd)

Indian
8 Gokhale Road, Kolkata 700 020

5.

Names and addresses of individuals who own the

newspaper and partners of shareholders holding
more than one per cent of capital

The Institution of Engineers (India)

8 Gokhale Road, Kolkata 700 020

I, Cdr A K Poothia, IN (Retd), hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

Dated: May 1, 2005

Vol 86, May 2005

Sd/- Cdr A K Poothia, IN (Retd)

Signature of Publisher

17