Guest guest Posted August 14, 2005 Report Share Posted August 14, 2005 Aloha and for the feedback. We will attempt to become more proficient (take the time) with manual artifacting. and ah Artifacting > > > We are wondering if anyone could comment on the best way to artifact > TLC Assess recordings using Infinity software. at Thought > Technology suggested using a value of 25 or 30 for automatic > artifacting. That value works much of the time, but at times we have > had to artifact much higher in order to get the data to show up in the > printouts. We realize some seizure, or other high voltage activity can > cause a great deal of amplitude changes, and we do not want to > eliminate pertinent data from the analysis, so where do we draw the > line?, 50? > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Mahalo > > and ah > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2005 Report Share Posted October 26, 2005 Working with Infinity and Pro-Comp does anyone using this equipment prefer auto artifacting or manual artifacting? Manual is taking much longer and I am not sure if it is better quality. Kodoish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 I ran into this if I had another TLC open, like the assessment. artifacting I am having difficulty with the artifacting program, i.e. when I push CTRL, Shift, S, nothing happens. It doesnt' happen all the time, but it surely is tonight and I am stuck.Can anyone tell me how to correct this? thanks, Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 thanks, . artifacting I am having difficulty with the artifacting program, i.e. when I push CTRL, Shift, S, nothing happens. It doesnt' happen all the time, but it surely is tonight and I am stuck.Can anyone tell me how to correct this? thanks, Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Pete, I just artifacted an assessment that I had previously done without artifacting. Final ratios and other data hardly changed at all. When I artifacted, I deleted most figures that were above the “85%” level, and a few that were included in groups where many were over this level. I am wondering if it really is necessary to exclude any values unless they are grossly out of whack. Otherwise, it seems we are arbitrarily eliminating the top 15 % or so of numbers in all montages and conditions. I may not have paid close enough attention in my recent training since I was not sure I was going to get into artifacting. Also, I did always delete the first entry in each montage, always artificially low. Should we look for other possible lower numbers or is most artifacting going to lead to high numbers (e.g. from movement, loose connection, 60 cycle, muscle, etc.)? Saint From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Van Deusen Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:02 PM Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes Nick, I use strictly the neurotrode electrodes (which often, unfortunately, come pre-gelled) with just a dab of paste and they work great on head sites with hair. The pellet electrodes have a very small footprint and are perhaps harder to keep in place. I honestly can't say what the effect of using Ag/AgCl electrodes in a pellet or neurotrode for some sites and standard Ag/AgCl electrodes at other sites would be. I guess you could test it out and find out, but so far my preference has been to use the same system for all placements. Pete > > From: NICK MAMMANO <nickmammano@...> > Date: 2006/05/24 Wed AM 09:04:04 EDT > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > Pete: I understand what you're saying. But does the no-no extend to mixing METAL (or metal/chloride electrodes) with GELLED electrodes? The latter don't work very well on the scalp (with hair that is), but they are convenient and seem to stick better on the ears, forehead etc. as grounds. > > So the rule is that " ALL ELECTRODES IN A GIVEN SESSION MUST ALWAYS BE IDENTICAL. " Is that the case? > > Van Deusen <pvdtlc@...> wrote: > Yes, all electrodes in a montage should be made of the same metal, preferably roughly the same age and even the same type if possible. Offset, which is a measure of the relationship between electrodes in a channel, is as important as impedance in its effect on signal quality. For the same reason that a discolored electrode, one which is flaking off its plating, should not be used (i.e. it becomes a bi-metallic electrode, thus creating a small " battery " which affects the signal), using 2 electrodes that are made of different metals has the same effect. > > Pete > > > > > From: " Strawderman " <straw856@...> > > Date: 2006/05/23 Tue AM 08:41:27 EDT > > < > > > Subject: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > On the subject of electrodes, someone mentioned to me recently that all the electrodes being used at one time must be made of the same material (i.e. gold, silver, tin). So for example, if training with gold electrodes, it is necessary to also be using gold plated ear clip electrodes. Is this true, and if so, why? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > ~Betsy > > Van Deusen > http://www.brain-trainer.com > > 16246 SW 92nd Ave, Miami, FL 33157 > 305/251-0337 or (cellular) 305/321-1595 > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Pete, I just artifacted an assessment that I had previously done without artifacting. Final ratios and other data hardly changed at all. When I artifacted, I deleted most figures that were above the “85%” level, and a few that were included in groups where many were over this level. I am wondering if it really is necessary to exclude any values unless they are grossly out of whack. Otherwise, it seems we are arbitrarily eliminating the top 15 % or so of numbers in all montages and conditions. I may not have paid close enough attention in my recent training since I was not sure I was going to get into artifacting. Also, I did always delete the first entry in each montage, always artificially low. Should we look for other possible lower numbers or is most artifacting going to lead to high numbers (e.g. from movement, loose connection, 60 cycle, muscle, etc.)? Saint From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Van Deusen Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:02 PM Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes Nick, I use strictly the neurotrode electrodes (which often, unfortunately, come pre-gelled) with just a dab of paste and they work great on head sites with hair. The pellet electrodes have a very small footprint and are perhaps harder to keep in place. I honestly can't say what the effect of using Ag/AgCl electrodes in a pellet or neurotrode for some sites and standard Ag/AgCl electrodes at other sites would be. I guess you could test it out and find out, but so far my preference has been to use the same system for all placements. Pete > > From: NICK MAMMANO <nickmammano@...> > Date: 2006/05/24 Wed AM 09:04:04 EDT > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > Pete: I understand what you're saying. But does the no-no extend to mixing METAL (or metal/chloride electrodes) with GELLED electrodes? The latter don't work very well on the scalp (with hair that is), but they are convenient and seem to stick better on the ears, forehead etc. as grounds. > > So the rule is that " ALL ELECTRODES IN A GIVEN SESSION MUST ALWAYS BE IDENTICAL. " Is that the case? > > Van Deusen <pvdtlc@...> wrote: > Yes, all electrodes in a montage should be made of the same metal, preferably roughly the same age and even the same type if possible. Offset, which is a measure of the relationship between electrodes in a channel, is as important as impedance in its effect on signal quality. For the same reason that a discolored electrode, one which is flaking off its plating, should not be used (i.e. it becomes a bi-metallic electrode, thus creating a small " battery " which affects the signal), using 2 electrodes that are made of different metals has the same effect. > > Pete > > > > > From: " Strawderman " <straw856@...> > > Date: 2006/05/23 Tue AM 08:41:27 EDT > > < > > > Subject: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > On the subject of electrodes, someone mentioned to me recently that all the electrodes being used at one time must be made of the same material (i.e. gold, silver, tin). So for example, if training with gold electrodes, it is necessary to also be using gold plated ear clip electrodes. Is this true, and if so, why? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > ~Betsy > > Van Deusen > http://www.brain-trainer.com > > 16246 SW 92nd Ave, Miami, FL 33157 > 305/251-0337 or (cellular) 305/321-1595 > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Saint, First of all, the artifacing is done manually exactly because I don't know of any way to build an algorithm that will automatically remove all artifact and only artifact. The red numbers are guides only. Since every file will have the top 15% of its values marked red, a client who produces very little artifact will need few if any lines removed; a client with a lot of artifact will need more than the 15% removed. If you have a client where artifact was not much of an issue, then you may see very little effect from the artifacting process. However, for clients who blink a lot or have muscle bracing issues, it can make a huge difference. Pete > > From: " St Lee " <stgeorgelee@...> > Date: 2006/05/25 Thu AM 10:20:27 EDT > < > > Subject: RE: Artifacting > > Pete, > > > > I just artifacted an assessment that I had previously done without > artifacting. Final ratios and other data hardly changed at all. When I > artifacted, I deleted most figures that were above the " 85% " level, and a > few that were included in groups where many were over this level. I am > wondering if it really is necessary to exclude any values unless they are > grossly out of whack. Otherwise, it seems we are arbitrarily eliminating the > top 15 % or so of numbers in all montages and conditions. I may not have > paid close enough attention in my recent training since I was not sure I was > going to get into artifacting. > > > > Also, I did always delete the first entry in each montage, always > artificially low. Should we look for other possible lower numbers or is > most artifacting going to lead to high numbers (e.g. from movement, loose > connection, 60 cycle, muscle, etc.)? > > > > Saint > > > > _____ > > From: [mailto: ] On > Behalf Of Van Deusen > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:02 PM > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > Nick, > > I use strictly the neurotrode electrodes (which often, unfortunately, come > pre-gelled) with just a dab of paste and they work great on head sites with > hair. The pellet electrodes have a very small footprint and are perhaps > harder to keep in place. > > I honestly can't say what the effect of using Ag/AgCl electrodes in a pellet > or neurotrode for some sites and standard Ag/AgCl electrodes at other sites > would be. I guess you could test it out and find out, but so far my > preference has been to use the same system for all placements. > > Pete > > > > > From: NICK MAMMANO <nickmammano@...> > > Date: 2006/05/24 Wed AM 09:04:04 EDT > > > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > Pete: I understand what you're saying. But does the no-no extend to > mixing METAL (or metal/chloride electrodes) with GELLED electrodes? The > latter don't work very well on the scalp (with hair that is), but they are > convenient and seem to stick better on the ears, forehead etc. as grounds. > > > > So the rule is that " ALL ELECTRODES IN A GIVEN SESSION MUST ALWAYS BE > IDENTICAL. " Is that the case? > > > > Van Deusen <pvdtlc@...> wrote: > > Yes, all electrodes in a montage should be made of the same metal, > preferably roughly the same age and even the same type if possible. Offset, > which is a measure of the relationship between electrodes in a channel, is > as important as impedance in its effect on signal quality. For the same > reason that a discolored electrode, one which is flaking off its plating, > should not be used (i.e. it becomes a bi-metallic electrode, thus creating a > small " battery " which affects the signal), using 2 electrodes that are made > of different metals has the same effect. > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > From: " Strawderman " <straw856@...> > > > Date: 2006/05/23 Tue AM 08:41:27 EDT > > > < > > > > Subject: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > > > On the subject of electrodes, someone mentioned to me recently that all > the electrodes being used at one time must be made of the same material > (i.e. gold, silver, tin). So for example, if training with gold electrodes, > it is necessary to also be using gold plated ear clip electrodes. Is this > true, and if so, why? > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > ~Betsy > > > > Van Deusen > > http://www.brain-trainer.com > > > > 16246 SW 92nd Ave, Miami, FL 33157 > > 305/251-0337 or (cellular) 305/321-1595 > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 Pete, Thanks. So to use my vernacular, look for the numbers way out to whack, whether none, 30 % of them or whatever. Sound good. Saint St. Lee stgeorgelee@... 757-595-0367 From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Van Deusen Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 10:37 AM Subject: Re: RE: Artifacting Saint, First of all, the artifacing is done manually exactly because I don't know of any way to build an algorithm that will automatically remove all artifact and only artifact. The red numbers are guides only. Since every file will have the top 15% of its values marked red, a client who produces very little artifact will need few if any lines removed; a client with a lot of artifact will need more than the 15% removed. If you have a client where artifact was not much of an issue, then you may see very little effect from the artifacting process. However, for clients who blink a lot or have muscle bracing issues, it can make a huge difference. Pete > > From: " St Lee " <stgeorgelee@...> > Date: 2006/05/25 Thu AM 10:20:27 EDT > < > > Subject: RE: Artifacting > > Pete, > > > > I just artifacted an assessment that I had previously done without > artifacting. Final ratios and other data hardly changed at all. When I > artifacted, I deleted most figures that were above the " 85% " level, and a > few that were included in groups where many were over this level. I am > wondering if it really is necessary to exclude any values unless they are > grossly out of whack. Otherwise, it seems we are arbitrarily eliminating the > top 15 % or so of numbers in all montages and conditions. I may not have > paid close enough attention in my recent training since I was not sure I was > going to get into artifacting. > > > > Also, I did always delete the first entry in each montage, always > artificially low. Should we look for other possible lower numbers or is > most artifacting going to lead to high numbers (e.g. from movement, loose > connection, 60 cycle, muscle, etc.)? > > > > Saint > > > > _____ > > From: [mailto: ] On > Behalf Of Van Deusen > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:02 PM > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > Nick, > > I use strictly the neurotrode electrodes (which often, unfortunately, come > pre-gelled) with just a dab of paste and they work great on head sites with > hair. The pellet electrodes have a very small footprint and are perhaps > harder to keep in place. > > I honestly can't say what the effect of using Ag/AgCl electrodes in a pellet > or neurotrode for some sites and standard Ag/AgCl electrodes at other sites > would be. I guess you could test it out and find out, but so far my > preference has been to use the same system for all placements. > > Pete > > > > > From: NICK MAMMANO <nickmammano@...> > > Date: 2006/05/24 Wed AM 09:04:04 EDT > > > > Subject: Re: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > Pete: I understand what you're saying. But does the no-no extend to > mixing METAL (or metal/chloride electrodes) with GELLED electrodes? The > latter don't work very well on the scalp (with hair that is), but they are > convenient and seem to stick better on the ears, forehead etc. as grounds. > > > > So the rule is that " ALL ELECTRODES IN A GIVEN SESSION MUST ALWAYS BE > IDENTICAL. " Is that the case? > > > > Van Deusen <pvdtlc@...> wrote: > > Yes, all electrodes in a montage should be made of the same metal, > preferably roughly the same age and even the same type if possible. Offset, > which is a measure of the relationship between electrodes in a channel, is > as important as impedance in its effect on signal quality. For the same > reason that a discolored electrode, one which is flaking off its plating, > should not be used (i.e. it becomes a bi-metallic electrode, thus creating a > small " battery " which affects the signal), using 2 electrodes that are made > of different metals has the same effect. > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > From: " Strawderman " <straw856@...> > > > Date: 2006/05/23 Tue AM 08:41:27 EDT > > > < > > > > Subject: Re: Just starting out:Electrodes > > > > > > On the subject of electrodes, someone mentioned to me recently that all > the electrodes being used at one time must be made of the same material > (i.e. gold, silver, tin). So for example, if training with gold electrodes, > it is necessary to also be using gold plated ear clip electrodes. Is this > true, and if so, why? > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > ~Betsy > > > > Van Deusen > > http://www.brain-trainer.com > > > > 16246 SW 92nd Ave, Miami, FL 33157 > > 305/251-0337 or (cellular) 305/321-1595 > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2006 Report Share Posted May 25, 2006 St. , Also, you can observe the trainee while they are training, to get an idea of whether they are generating artifact. And you can look at the raw signal afterwards for signs of artifact. Foxx -----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of St. LeeSent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:31 AM Subject: RE: RE: Artifacting Pete, Thanks. So to use my vernacular, look for the numbers way out to whack, whether none, 30 % of them or whatever. Sound good. Saint St. Lee stgeorgelee@... 757-595-0367 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.