RE: Othmer low reward

July 11, 2008

Actually, when I trained with the Othmers in the mid-90's, there were lots of intrahemispheric bipolar protocols. T3/Fp1 and T4/Fp1 were the precursors of T3/T4. C3/P3, C3/F3, C4/P4 and C4/F4 were all commonly used for specific issues, and they often worked pretty well, with beta rewards on the left and SMR/lobeta rewards on the right.

Pete

I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this?

Mark

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlc@...http://www.brain-trainer.com

305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc.

July 11, 2008

Actually, when I trained with the Othmers in the mid-90's, there were lots of intrahemispheric bipolar protocols. T3/Fp1 and T4/Fp1 were the precursors of T3/T4. C3/P3, C3/F3, C4/P4 and C4/F4 were all commonly used for specific issues, and they often worked pretty well, with beta rewards on the left and SMR/lobeta rewards on the right.

Pete

I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this?

Mark

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlc@...http://www.brain-trainer.com

305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc.

July 11, 2008

Mark,Actually it may be re-convergence give that the Othmer's were introduced to NFB by Margaret. Regarding entropy and dominant frequency there is not direct focus. However given the focus on balance between frequencies the dominant frequency would often be a large contributing factor to the entropy value.I have seen dominant frequencies increase in a great many clients where the bulk of activity is in the lower frequencies. Fewer instances of folks with faster EEG have a slowing of Dominant,The effect of the entropy training on dominant frequency would depend to a large part on how much of a peak the dominant frequency produces. The greater the peak the greater the chance of change. The one place where I see least change is in clients who have generally low amplitude but high frequency profiles.Changes around dominant frequency could be twofold. First the frequency could reduce in amplitude say a large eyes open alpha peak decreasing in amplitude. It is also possible that the other frequencies could increase a bit in amplitude and decrease the relative difference between the peak and the rest of the spectrum. Unlike inhibit only approaches such as squash, which only require a reduction in total amplitude, entropy values can be raised by lowering high peaks or by raising the surrounding amplitudes. georgemartin@...www.northstarneurofeedback.com I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this? Mark Re: Re: Othmer low reward Rene, I asked Sig Othmer at iSNR last year if he could tell me what type of filters he used in their low frequency training. He could not but did suggest I download the designs from the eeg info site. Those designs are free and apparently still available. You could look to see what type of filtering they used there. In terms of Cygnet I am unsure of what filters they are using. One of the really powerful things that can happen in BIoEra is that changes in one object can result in changes in other objects as well. For instance in Cygnet as you lower the frequency range you are working the band also narrows. It may be that they also change filter order too. The Cygnet designs are not available for view or modification so it is not possible to say exactly they use. I suspect that Sig might say is something like this (and I beg forgiveness for putting words in some one else's mouth) I have heard others suggest this as well So here is the made up quote If you are down to signals at .5 hz a longer delay may not be as big a factor. As the wave form itself takes 2 seconds to cycle. Measuring a 30hz signal with that delay would of course be absurd. BioEra does not give a delay graph like BioEra does but here are the numbers I found when setting the eeg neuroamp as the source device with a 0 - 0.5 hz filter. All filters 3rd order in order to get a decent frequency roll off. Butterworth delay of 1.1 seconds Chebyshev, delay of 1.46 second Besel Delay of .68 seconds but the frequency roll of extends to 1.5 hz. I just downloaded the BioEx designs. The newest one, multiple inhibit one reward uses a second order elliptic filter. with a 0 to 3 hz range Elliptic filters are not available in BioEra at this time. The delay is just over 30 seconds at the lowest end (about .5 hz). The delay is hard to see on the graph in BE but looks to be a second or so just past .5 and slowly going up to about 2 seconds by the end of the band. Approximately the same delay seems to occur with a 0 to .5 hz filter with the largest delay coming from 0 to .05. Again about 30 seconds. The frequency distribution is quite broad, the peak is around 3hz with very shallow roll off. This may be more info than you wanted but I figured I'd be thorough georgemartinnorthstarneurofeedback www.northstarneurofeedback.com Rene, At 0-0.1 Hz as a reward band (which BE does just fine), you have some problems caused by the physics of digital signal processing (which perhaps the Othmers have repealed): 1. An elliptic filter, 1st order, which only produces a delay of 150 ms., isn't very accurate. In fact, it passes 200% of the signal around the area they want to measure but 100% of all activity up as high as nearly 2 Hz. Not exactly training 0-0.1 Hz. Raising the filter order to 2 provides a little more specific and accurate filter--but the time delay goes up around 1.5 seconds and above. 2. The Butterworth filter the Othmers usually use, in its fastest form (1st order) does provide a fairly accurate reading of the band they want to train, but the delay ranges from about 1/2 second to about 2.25 seconds. In other words, in order to actually SEE the frequency they say they are training, they have to set up the filters so they literally give the feedback between one and a half and two and a half seconds AFTER the even happens in the brain. That's the equivalent of trying to train a puppy by giving him a treat about 10 minutes after he does something you tell him to do. I leave it to you to imagine what kind of accuracy and delay are provided by asking a filter to measure a band that is 2/100 of a Hz (the above are 50/100 Hz wide). is more versed in BioEra, which is the real software under Cygnet, so perhaps he can tell us that I'm completely off base here and that there are filters or other devices in BioEra that will indeed allow a fast and accurate measuring of signals in this range. Otherwise, we can all find out how effective this will be--and I'm sure it will represent yet another revolutionary improvement in results--by buying the Othmers' software, which I understand is quite expensive and does essentially this one thing. Pete On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:41 PM, renekay97213 <rene.campagnaprovidence (DOT) org> wrote: My previous provider was Othmer based and she was using one channel bipolar training, multiple inhibits, with a reward of 0.0--0.1 QDS will support 0.0 --0.1 and even lower, but Bioexplorer will not go down lower than 0.0 -- 0.1 I received a recent EEG info e newsletter and it sounds like the Othmers are going lower with the Cygnet--- as low as O.O -- O.05 and 0.0 ---0.02. As usual in the field of neurofeedback, there are many opinions about whether or not going that low is effective or necessary, but it is the direction that EEG Info seems to be going. .-- Van Deusenpvdtlcgmail http://www.brain-trainer.com305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --- --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --- --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

July 11, 2008

Mark,Actually it may be re-convergence give that the Othmer's were introduced to NFB by Margaret. Regarding entropy and dominant frequency there is not direct focus. However given the focus on balance between frequencies the dominant frequency would often be a large contributing factor to the entropy value.I have seen dominant frequencies increase in a great many clients where the bulk of activity is in the lower frequencies. Fewer instances of folks with faster EEG have a slowing of Dominant,The effect of the entropy training on dominant frequency would depend to a large part on how much of a peak the dominant frequency produces. The greater the peak the greater the chance of change. The one place where I see least change is in clients who have generally low amplitude but high frequency profiles.Changes around dominant frequency could be twofold. First the frequency could reduce in amplitude say a large eyes open alpha peak decreasing in amplitude. It is also possible that the other frequencies could increase a bit in amplitude and decrease the relative difference between the peak and the rest of the spectrum. Unlike inhibit only approaches such as squash, which only require a reduction in total amplitude, entropy values can be raised by lowering high peaks or by raising the surrounding amplitudes. georgemartin@...www.northstarneurofeedback.com I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this? Mark Re: Re: Othmer low reward Rene, I asked Sig Othmer at iSNR last year if he could tell me what type of filters he used in their low frequency training. He could not but did suggest I download the designs from the eeg info site. Those designs are free and apparently still available. You could look to see what type of filtering they used there. In terms of Cygnet I am unsure of what filters they are using. One of the really powerful things that can happen in BIoEra is that changes in one object can result in changes in other objects as well. For instance in Cygnet as you lower the frequency range you are working the band also narrows. It may be that they also change filter order too. The Cygnet designs are not available for view or modification so it is not possible to say exactly they use. I suspect that Sig might say is something like this (and I beg forgiveness for putting words in some one else's mouth) I have heard others suggest this as well So here is the made up quote If you are down to signals at .5 hz a longer delay may not be as big a factor. As the wave form itself takes 2 seconds to cycle. Measuring a 30hz signal with that delay would of course be absurd. BioEra does not give a delay graph like BioEra does but here are the numbers I found when setting the eeg neuroamp as the source device with a 0 - 0.5 hz filter. All filters 3rd order in order to get a decent frequency roll off. Butterworth delay of 1.1 seconds Chebyshev, delay of 1.46 second Besel Delay of .68 seconds but the frequency roll of extends to 1.5 hz. I just downloaded the BioEx designs. The newest one, multiple inhibit one reward uses a second order elliptic filter. with a 0 to 3 hz range Elliptic filters are not available in BioEra at this time. The delay is just over 30 seconds at the lowest end (about .5 hz). The delay is hard to see on the graph in BE but looks to be a second or so just past .5 and slowly going up to about 2 seconds by the end of the band. Approximately the same delay seems to occur with a 0 to .5 hz filter with the largest delay coming from 0 to .05. Again about 30 seconds. The frequency distribution is quite broad, the peak is around 3hz with very shallow roll off. This may be more info than you wanted but I figured I'd be thorough georgemartinnorthstarneurofeedback www.northstarneurofeedback.com Rene, At 0-0.1 Hz as a reward band (which BE does just fine), you have some problems caused by the physics of digital signal processing (which perhaps the Othmers have repealed): 1. An elliptic filter, 1st order, which only produces a delay of 150 ms., isn't very accurate. In fact, it passes 200% of the signal around the area they want to measure but 100% of all activity up as high as nearly 2 Hz. Not exactly training 0-0.1 Hz. Raising the filter order to 2 provides a little more specific and accurate filter--but the time delay goes up around 1.5 seconds and above. 2. The Butterworth filter the Othmers usually use, in its fastest form (1st order) does provide a fairly accurate reading of the band they want to train, but the delay ranges from about 1/2 second to about 2.25 seconds. In other words, in order to actually SEE the frequency they say they are training, they have to set up the filters so they literally give the feedback between one and a half and two and a half seconds AFTER the even happens in the brain. That's the equivalent of trying to train a puppy by giving him a treat about 10 minutes after he does something you tell him to do. I leave it to you to imagine what kind of accuracy and delay are provided by asking a filter to measure a band that is 2/100 of a Hz (the above are 50/100 Hz wide). is more versed in BioEra, which is the real software under Cygnet, so perhaps he can tell us that I'm completely off base here and that there are filters or other devices in BioEra that will indeed allow a fast and accurate measuring of signals in this range. Otherwise, we can all find out how effective this will be--and I'm sure it will represent yet another revolutionary improvement in results--by buying the Othmers' software, which I understand is quite expensive and does essentially this one thing. Pete On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:41 PM, renekay97213 <rene.campagnaprovidence (DOT) org> wrote: My previous provider was Othmer based and she was using one channel bipolar training, multiple inhibits, with a reward of 0.0--0.1 QDS will support 0.0 --0.1 and even lower, but Bioexplorer will not go down lower than 0.0 -- 0.1 I received a recent EEG info e newsletter and it sounds like the Othmers are going lower with the Cygnet--- as low as O.O -- O.05 and 0.0 ---0.02. As usual in the field of neurofeedback, there are many opinions about whether or not going that low is effective or necessary, but it is the direction that EEG Info seems to be going. .-- Van Deusenpvdtlcgmail http://www.brain-trainer.com305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --- --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --- --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

July 11, 2008

Food for thought. Thanks

Re: Re: Othmer low reward

Rene,

I asked Sig Othmer at iSNR last year if he could tell me what type of filters he used in their low frequency training. He could not but did suggest I download the designs from the eeg info site. Those designs are free and apparently still available. You could look to see what type of filtering they used there.

In terms of Cygnet I am unsure of what filters they are using. One of the really powerful things that can happen in BIoEra is that changes in one object can result in changes in other objects as well. For instance in Cygnet as you lower the frequency range you are working the band also narrows. It may be that they also change filter order too. The Cygnet designs are not available for view or modification so it is not possible to say exactly they use.

I suspect that Sig might say is something like this (and I beg forgiveness for putting words in some one else's mouth)

I have heard others suggest this as well

So here is the made up quote

If you are down to signals at .5 hz a longer delay may not be as big a factor. As the wave form itself takes 2 seconds to cycle. Measuring a 30hz signal with that delay would of course be absurd.

BioEra does not give a delay graph like BioEra does but here are the numbers I found when setting the eeg neuroamp as the source device with a 0 - 0.5 hz filter.

All filters 3rd order in order to get a decent frequency roll off.

Butterworth delay of 1.1 seconds

Chebyshev, delay of 1.46 second

Besel Delay of .68 seconds but the frequency roll of extends to 1.5 hz.

I just downloaded the BioEx designs.

The newest one, multiple inhibit one reward uses a second order elliptic filter. with a 0 to 3 hz range Elliptic filters are not available in BioEra at this time.

The delay is just over 30 seconds at the lowest end (about .5 hz). The delay is hard to see on the graph in BE but looks to be a second or so just past .5 and slowly going up to about 2 seconds by the end of the band.

Approximately the same delay seems to occur with a 0 to .5 hz filter with the largest delay coming from 0 to .05. Again about 30 seconds.

The frequency distribution is quite broad, the peak is around 3hz with very shallow roll off.

This may be more info than you wanted but I figured I'd be thorough

georgemartinnorthstarneurofeedback

www.northstarneurofeedback.com

Rene,

At 0-0.1 Hz as a reward band (which BE does just fine), you have some problems caused by the physics of digital signal processing (which perhaps the Othmers have repealed):

1. An elliptic filter, 1st order, which only produces a delay of 150 ms., isn't very accurate. In fact, it passes 200% of the signal around the area they want to measure but 100% of all activity up as high as nearly 2 Hz. Not exactly training 0-0.1 Hz. Raising the filter order to 2 provides a little more specific and accurate filter--but the time delay goes up around 1.5 seconds and above.

2. The Butterworth filter the Othmers usually use, in its fastest form (1st order) does provide a fairly accurate reading of the band they want to train, but the delay ranges from about 1/2 second to about 2.25 seconds.

In other words, in order to actually SEE the frequency they say they are training, they have to set up the filters so they literally give the feedback between one and a half and two and a half seconds AFTER the even happens in the brain. That's the equivalent of trying to train a puppy by giving him a treat about 10 minutes after he does something you tell him to do.

I leave it to you to imagine what kind of accuracy and delay are provided by asking a filter to measure a band that is 2/100 of a Hz (the above are 50/100 Hz wide).

is more versed in BioEra, which is the real software under Cygnet, so perhaps he can tell us that I'm completely off base here and that there are filters or other devices in BioEra that will indeed allow a fast and accurate measuring of signals in this range.

Otherwise, we can all find out how effective this will be--and I'm sure it will represent yet another revolutionary improvement in results--by buying the Othmers' software, which I understand is quite expensive and does essentially this one thing.

Pete

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:41 PM, renekay97213 <rene.campagnaprovidence (DOT) org> wrote:

My previous provider was Othmer based and she was using one channel bipolar training, multiple inhibits, with a reward of 0.0--0.1 QDS will support 0.0 --0.1 and even lower, but Bioexplorer will not go down lower than 0.0 -- 0.1 I received a recent EEG info e newsletter and it sounds like the Othmers are going lower with the Cygnet--- as low as O.O -- O.05 and 0.0 ---0.02. As usual in the field of neurofeedback, there are many opinions about whether or not going that low is effective or necessary, but it is the direction that EEG Info seems to be going.

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlcgmail http://www.brain-trainer.com305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc.

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

July 11, 2008

Pete

I'm happier with that approach before venturing off into low frequency domains. In some ways it sounds like the Othmers are re-discovering their own wheel.

Mark

Re: Re: Othmer low reward

Actually, when I trained with the Othmers in the mid-90's, there were lots of intrahemispheric bipolar protocols. T3/Fp1 and T4/Fp1 were the precursors of T3/T4. C3/P3, C3/F3, C4/P4 and C4/F4 were all commonly used for specific issues, and they often worked pretty well, with beta rewards on the left and SMR/lobeta rewards on the right.

Pete

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Mark Baddeley <baddeleyhermes (DOT) net.au> wrote:

I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this?

Mark

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlcgmail http://www.brain-trainer.com305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc.

July 11, 2008

Pete

I'm happier with that approach before venturing off into low frequency domains. In some ways it sounds like the Othmers are re-discovering their own wheel.

Mark

Re: Re: Othmer low reward

Actually, when I trained with the Othmers in the mid-90's, there were lots of intrahemispheric bipolar protocols. T3/Fp1 and T4/Fp1 were the precursors of T3/T4. C3/P3, C3/F3, C4/P4 and C4/F4 were all commonly used for specific issues, and they often worked pretty well, with beta rewards on the left and SMR/lobeta rewards on the right.

Pete

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Mark Baddeley <baddeleyhermes (DOT) net.au> wrote:

I hadn't known of Margaret Ayres protocols so some convergence there. I've been thinking that there needs to be some approach that works with the dominat frequency in the EEg spectrum. Does entropy have some bearing on this?

Mark

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlcgmail http://www.brain-trainer.com305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc.

July 12, 2008

you are correct

there is no scientific proof of anything for homeopathy

it is considered an energy modality

but hey it works!!!

and believe me i am not the kind that believes in the feather waving, chicken chanting stuff!!!

July 12, 2008

you are correct

there is no scientific proof of anything for homeopathy

it is considered an energy modality

but hey it works!!!

and believe me i am not the kind that believes in the feather waving, chicken chanting stuff!!!

July 12, 2008

yes yes i agree

i originally trained with the othmers and found their work fascinating and still do

and in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)

can't explain why though

as you said

too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions

great idea

July 12, 2008

yes yes i agree

i originally trained with the othmers and found their work fascinating and still do

and in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)

can't explain why though

as you said

too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions

great idea

July 12, 2008

I have not used the Othmer low reward for ASD but have used Margaret Ayers approach which is strictly inhibitory,. georgemartin@...www.northstarneurofeedback.com yes yes i agreei originally trained with the othmers and found their work fascinating and still doand in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)can't explain why thoughas you said too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions great idea

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

July 12, 2008

I have not used the Othmer low reward for ASD but have used Margaret Ayers approach which is strictly inhibitory,. georgemartin@...www.northstarneurofeedback.com yes yes i agreei originally trained with the othmers and found their work fascinating and still doand in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)can't explain why thoughas you said too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions great idea

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

July 19, 2008

It is really hard to say whether othmers approach might be the better

solution or not. It is too important which reward frequency one uses.

This is still a growing myth for me, because it is so hard to

understand. But anyway I just works!

>

> yes yes i agree

> i originally trained with the othmers and found their work

fascinating and still do

> and in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work

better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)

> can't explain why though

> as you said

>

> too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions

>

> great idea

>

July 19, 2008

It is really hard to say whether othmers approach might be the better

solution or not. It is too important which reward frequency one uses.

This is still a growing myth for me, because it is so hard to

understand. But anyway I just works!

>

> yes yes i agree

> i originally trained with the othmers and found their work

fascinating and still do

> and in fact i find that many times for autism it seems to work

better than traditional NFb (TLC version stuff)

> can't explain why though

> as you said

>

> too bad they won't let anyone get a Q during sessions

>

> great idea

>

October 8, 2008

I can't be sure as I've been unable to track down the original paper but

this may be the basic science that provides an explanation for the

success of the very low frequency training pioneered by the Othmers.Low-frequency human brain signal studiedhttp://www.upi.com/Science_News/2008/10/06/Low-frequency_human_brain_signal_studied/UPI-82391223321158/

(the above is a quick summary of this longer summary)Direct Recording Shows Brain Signal Persists Even In Dreamless Sleep

http://mednews.wustl.edu/news/page/normal/12575.html

I've been unable to track down the actual scientific paper at PubMed or PNAS at this time. I got a reply from the author of the summary at WUSTL and he said the paper has been delayed for some time at PNAS but it should be published soon.

Some brief quotes from the summary:

" Neuroscientists have taken one of the first direct looks at one of the

human brain's most fundamental 'foundations:' a brain signal that never

switches off and may support many cognitive functions.(underlining is mine)

Although the brain's different specialized regions can be considered

as a collection of physical structures, functional architecture instead

focuses on metaphorical structures formed by brain processes and

interactions among different brain regions. The " foundation "

highlighted in the new study is a low-frequency signal created by

neuronal activity throughout the brain. This signal doesn't switch off

even in dreamless sleep, possibly to help maintain basic structure and

facilitate offline housekeeping activities.

" A different, more labile and higher-frequency signal known as the

gamma frequency activity has been the focus of much brain research in

recent years, " says first author Biyu He, a graduate student. " But we

found that signal loses its large-scale structure in deep sleep, while

the low-frequency signal does not, suggesting that the low-frequency

signal may be more fundamental. "

" What we've been finding is reorienting the way we think about how

the brain works, " says senior author Marcus Raichle, M.D., professor of

radiology, of neurology and of neurobiology. " We're starting to see the

brain as being in the prediction business, with ongoing, organized

carrier frequencies within the systems of the brain that keep them

prepared for the work they need to do to perform mental tasks. " " Jay Gattis, Psy.D.Psychotherapy, Neurofeedback and qEEG/rEEG Brain Mapping servicesCosta Mesa, CAwww.drjaygattis.com

Mark,At this time I think that the Othmer's would suggest that the reward frequency (individualized for each client) is more important, although he may say the interaction is what is important. They have spent a great deal of time optimizing the reward based portions of the approach. And the response, in session, they get from hitting the " right " reward is what they emphasize.

Given my work with roshi, squash, windowed or not, and of late, spectral entropy, combined with the research that is just recently out (that which Pete shared) I suspect the " immediate " response may be less important overall than the balancing of the frequency spectrum in terms of long term results. The Othmers have migrated from two broad inhibits to a set of several narrower inhibits over the past year or so. In a recent post Sig suggested that those inhibits act in a fashion similar to NCP in " reduction of emergent variability "

The difference between squash, multiple inhibits and an entropy formula is that the inhibits focus only on reduction of amplitude, balance may or may not improve, while entropy focuses on the actual balance between much narrower bins. I am using 20 2hz bins from 2-42.

georgemartin@...www.northstarneurofeedback.com

Hi at al.

I've been privately musing if the inhibits are the real factor but then thought the Othmers would say getting the right reward frequency adds an important if not essential ingedient.

Mark

Re: Re: Othmer low reward Rene, I asked Sig Othmer at iSNR last year if he could tell me what type of filters he used in their low frequency training. He could not but did suggest I download the designs from the eeg info site. Those designs are free and apparently still available. You could look to see what type of filtering they used there.

In terms of Cygnet I am unsure of what filters they are using. One of the really powerful things that can happen in BIoEra is that changes in one object can result in changes in other objects as well. For instance in Cygnet as you lower the frequency range you are working the band also narrows. It may be that they also change filter order too. The Cygnet designs are not available for view or modification so it is not possible to say exactly they use.

I suspect that Sig might say is something like this (and I beg forgiveness for putting words in some one else's mouth) I have heard others suggest this as well So here is the made up quote

If you are down to signals at .5 hz a longer delay may not be as big a factor. As the wave form itself takes 2 seconds to cycle. Measuring a 30hz signal with that delay would of course be absurd.

BioEra does not give a delay graph like BioEra does but here are the numbers I found when setting the eeg neuroamp as the source device with a 0 - 0.5 hz filter. All filters 3rd order in order to get a decent frequency roll off.

Butterworth delay of 1.1 seconds Chebyshev, delay of 1.46 second Besel Delay of .68 seconds but the frequency roll of extends to 1.5 hz.

I just downloaded the BioEx designs. The newest one, multiple inhibit one reward uses a second order elliptic filter. with a 0 to 3 hz range Elliptic filters are not available in BioEra at this time.

The delay is just over 30 seconds at the lowest end (about .5 hz). The delay is hard to see on the graph in BE but looks to be a second or so just past .5 and slowly going up to about 2 seconds by the end of the band.

Approximately the same delay seems to occur with a 0 to .5 hz filter with the largest delay coming from 0 to .05. Again about 30 seconds. The frequency distribution is quite broad, the peak is around 3hz with very shallow roll off.

This may be more info than you wanted but I figured I'd be thorough

georgemartin@... www.northstarneurofeedback.com

Rene, At 0-0.1 Hz as a reward band (which BE does just fine), you have some problems caused by the physics of digital signal processing (which perhaps the Othmers have repealed):

1. An elliptic filter, 1st order, which only produces a delay of 150 ms., isn't very accurate. In fact, it passes 200% of the signal around the area they want to measure but 100% of all activity up as high as nearly 2 Hz. Not exactly training 0-0.1 Hz. Raising the filter order to 2 provides a little more specific and accurate filter--but the time delay goes up around 1.5 seconds and above.

2. The Butterworth filter the Othmers usually use, in its fastest form (1st order) does provide a fairly accurate reading of the band they want to train, but the delay ranges from about 1/2 second to about 2.25 seconds.

In other words, in order to actually SEE the frequency they say they are training, they have to set up the filters so they literally give the feedback between one and a half and two and a half seconds AFTER the even happens in the brain. That's the equivalent of trying to train a puppy by giving him a treat about 10 minutes after he does something you tell him to do.

I leave it to you to imagine what kind of accuracy and delay are provided by asking a filter to measure a band that is 2/100 of a Hz (the above are 50/100 Hz wide).

is more versed in BioEra, which is the real software under Cygnet, so perhaps he can tell us that I'm completely off base here and that there are filters or other devices in BioEra that will indeed allow a fast and accurate measuring of signals in this range.

Otherwise, we can all find out how effective this will be--and I'm sure it will represent yet another revolutionary improvement in results--by buying the Othmers' software, which I understand is quite expensive and does essentially this one thing.

Pete

My previous provider was Othmer based and she was using one

channel bipolar training, multiple inhibits, with a reward of 0.0--0.1 QDS will support 0.0 --0.1 and even lower, but Bioexplorer will not go down lower than 0.0 -- 0.1

I received a recent EEG info e newsletter and it sounds like the Othmers are going lower with the Cygnet--- as low as O.O -- O.05 and 0.0 ---0.02. As usual in the field of neurofeedback, there are many

opinions about whether or not going that low is effective or necessary, but it is the direction that EEG Info seems to be going.

..-- Van Deusenpvdtlc@...http://www.brain-trainer.com

305/433-3160The Learning Curve, Inc. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! ---

October 8, 2008