Towards a Versatile Surface Electromyography Classification System

  • Dimitrios Barmpakos
  • Nikolaos Strimpakos
  • Stavros A. KarkanisEmail author
  • Constantinos Pattichis
Conference paper
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 57)


The use of sEMG signals for the movement classification plays an important role in various applications from robotics to effective prosthetic limbs control. The performance of the classification scheme is severely influenced by the efficiency of the used feature set to create discriminant subspaces for each movement. In the recent literature, various feature sets have been proposed, that usually create rather complicated feature spaces. The aim of this research is to propose a versatile scheme based on simple and uniform characteristics capable to significantly improve the performance of the movement classification by using the sEMG signals. The set is comprised of features like energies and a few other features from the well-know and widely used Hudgins set, all estimated on the wavelet domain of the sEMG signal. The application of the proposed scheme on standard database of sEMG signals, the NINAPRO a database that is built for benchmarking and algorithmic evaluation, proved that the classification performance of movements exceeds 96% with a significant improvement when compared with the performance of other schemes proposed.


Movement classification Wavelet energy NINAPRO Electromyography Prosthetic limb control 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Atzori M, Gijsberts A, Heynen S, Hager A M, Deriaz O, Van der Smagt P, Castellini C, Caputo B and Müller H (2012) Building the NINAPRO Database: a Resource for the Biorobotics Community, IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), Rome, Italy, 2012, pp 1258-1265Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A Hiraiwa, N Uchida and K Shimohara (1992) EMG Pattern Recognition by Neural Networks for Prosthetic Fingers Control. Annual Review in Automatic Programming 17:73-79Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Latwesen A, Patterson PE (1994) Identification of lower arm motions using the EMG signals of shoulder muscles. Medical Engineering & Physics 16(2):113-121Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Timemy A H, Bugmann G, Escudero J, Outram N (2013) Classification of Finger Movements for the Dexterous Hand Prosthesis Control With Surface Electromyography. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics 17(3):608-618Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M Atzori, C Castellini and H Müller (2012) Spatial Registration of Hand Muscle Electromyography Signals, 7th International Workshop on Biosignal Interpretation, Como, Italy, 2012, pp 239-242Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M Atzori, H Müller and M Baechler (2013) Recognition of Hand Movements in a Trans–Radial Amputated Subject by sEMG, Proc. of the International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Seattle, Washington, USA, 2013, pp 44Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A Gijsberts, B Caputo (2013) Exploiting Accelerometers to Improve Movement Classification for Prosthetics, Proc. of the International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Seattle, Washington, USA, 2013, pp 1-5Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    I Kuzborskij, A Gijsberts, and B Caputo (2013) On the Challenge of Classifying 52 Hand Movements from Surface Electromyography, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Osaka, Japan, 2013, pp. 4931-4937Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hudgins B, Parker P and Scott R (1993) A new strategy for multifunction myoelectric control. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 40(1):82–94Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A Phinyomark, F Quaine, S Charbonnier, C Serviere, F Tarpin-Bernard and Y Laurillau (2013) EMG feature evaluation for improving myoelectric pattern recognition robustness. Expert Systems with Applications 40(12):4832-4840Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J Chiang, Z J Wang and M J McKeown, (2008) A Windowed Eigenspectrum Method for Multivariate sEMG Classification during Reaching Movements. IEEE Signal Processing Letters 15: 293-296Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C Christodoulou and C S Pattichis (1995) A new technique for the classification and decomposition of EMG signals, Proc. 1995 IEEE Int. Conf. Neural Networks vol. 5, New York, 1995, pp 2303–2308.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FHY Chan, Y S Yang, F K Lam, Y T Zhang and P A Parker (2000) Fuzzy EMG classification for prosthesis control. IEEE Trans. Rehabilitation Eng. 8(3): 305–311Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Phinyomark A, Limsakul C and Phukpattaranont P (2009) A Novel Feature Extraction for Robust EMG Pattern Recognition. Journal of Computing 1(1):71-80Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Y Meyer (1993) Wavelets: Algorithms and Applications. SIAM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P Yang, Q Li (2012) Wavelet transform-based feature extraction for ultrasonic flaw signal classification. Neural Comput & Applic. 24:817-826 DOI 10.1007/s00521-012-1305-7Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A Subasi (2012) Classification of EMG signals using combined features and soft computing Techniques. Applied Soft Computing 12(8): 2188-2198Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    N Wang, Y Chen, X Zhang (2013) The recognition of multi-finger prehensile postures using LDA. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 8(6):706-712Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitrios Barmpakos
    • 1
  • Nikolaos Strimpakos
    • 2
  • Stavros A. Karkanis
    • 3
    Email author
  • Constantinos Pattichis
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Electronic EngineeringTechnological Educational Institute of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of PhysiotherapyUniversity of Applied Sciences of Central GreeceLamiaGreece
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Applied Sciences of Central GreeceLamiaGreece
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations