Optimized Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials Estimation Using Simulated Annealing

  • N. Cherrid
  • A. Naït-AliEmail author
  • P. Siarry


In this paper, we use a new approach based on Simulated Annealing for estimating the BAEPs (brainstem auditory evoked potentials). Each BAEP is obtained through a hundred of responses to stimulations. In case of endocochlear pathologies, it has been assumed that these signals could be randomly delayed from a response to another one. In such cases, the application of the averaging method systematically leads to “smoothed” BAEPs, thus complicating both identification and interpretation operations. The method presented in this paper consists in minimizing a non linear criterion in order to obtain an alignment of the various responses, before averaging them. Simulated and experimental results are presented, and compared to those produced by the classical method.

Key Words

brainstem auditory evoked potentials endocochlear pathologies estimation simulated annealing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Courat JP, Raynaud G, Mrad I, Siarry P. Electronic component model minimization based on log simulated annealing. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, Part I: Fundamental Theory and Applications 1994; 41(12): 790–795.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fenwick PB, Mitchie CP, Dollimore J, Fenton GW. Application of the autoregressive model to EEG analysis. Agressologia 1969; 10: 553–564.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harper M, Harner S, Slavit D, Litchy W, Daube R, Beatty C, Ebersold M. Effect of BAEP monitoring on hearing preservation during acoustic neuroma resection. Neurology 1992; 42: 1551–1553.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Vecchi M. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 1983; 220(4598): 671–680.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kong X, Qiu T. Adaptive estimation of latency change in evoked potentials by direct least mean p-norm time delay estimation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1999; 46: 994–1003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Makhoul J. Linear prediction: A tutorial review. Proc IEEE 1975; 63: 561–580.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGillem CD, Aunon JI, Pomalaza CA. Improved waveform estimation procedures for event related potentials. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1985; 32: 371–379.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naït-Ali A, Adam O, Motsch JF. The brainstem auditory evoked potentials estimation using a bayesian deconvolution method, Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference of IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (CD-ROM), Amsterdam, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Naït-Ali A, Adam O, Motsch JF. On optimal aperiodic stimulation for brainstem auditory evoked potentials estimation. Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference of IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (CD-ROM), Chicago, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Naït-Ali A, Cherrid N, Siarry P, Motsch JF. Time delay estimation of brainstem auditory evoked potentials using Simulated Annealing. 13th International Conference of Systems Research, Informatics and Cybernetics INTERSYMP 2001, ISBN 1-894613-08-2, vol. II, pp. 44–48. Baden-Baden (Germany), 2001.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ohresser M, Toupet M, Vialla P, Strekers P. Les neurinomes à BERA normaux. Ann. Oto-laryng 1986; 215–212.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siarry P, Berthiau G, Durbin F, Haussy J. Enhanced Simulated Annealing for globally minimizing functions of many continuous variables, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 1997; 23: 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zetterberg LH. Estimation of parameters for a linear difference equation with application to EEG analysis. Med Biol Eng 1975; 13: 272–278.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Woody CD. Characterisation of an adaptive filter for analysis of variable latency neuroelectric signal. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing 1973; 5: 539–553.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aunon JI, Sencaj RW. Comparison of different techniques for processing evoked potentials. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing 1979; 16: 642–650.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Paris 12CréteilFrance

Personalised recommendations