Brain Wave Determination Device Using Canonical Correlation Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing biometric authentication techniques using brain waves face challenges in accurately determining whether a subject is different or the same due to non-linear behavior of brain waves in response to external stimuli, leading to insufficient accuracy and inability to assess differences in trial conditions or interests.
Innovation Solution
A determination device that acquires response matrices from brain electrical activity under multiple conditions, performs canonical correlation analysis, calculates distances between trials, and classifies them into clusters to determine the presence of substantial differences in conditions or interests.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If distance between frequency components is used for authentication, then authentication can be performed, but accuracy is insufficient due to non-linear behavior of brain waves
Solution Approach 1:
The patent transforms the brain wave data from frequency domain to time domain by performing inverse Fast Fourier Transform (IFFT) on the frequency components obtained from EEG signals. This parameter transformation allows the system to capture non-linear temporal patterns in brain wave responses that are lost in frequency analysis, thereby improving authentication accuracy while maintaining measurement precision
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary processing step involving IFFT transformation and template matching algorithms. Instead of directly comparing frequency components, the system converts them to time-domain waveforms, creates templates from multiple trials, and performs pattern matching. This intermediary process preserves the non-linear characteristics of brain wave responses while enabling reliable authentication
2Adaptability or versatility
If brain wave measurements are taken under multiple conditions, then determination of subject identity and interest differences becomes possible, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a universal determination device that can perform multiple functions: authenticating subject identity, determining interest in objects, and analyzing trial condition differences. The device uses the same core methodology (EEG measurement, IFFT transformation, template matching) across different application scenarios, reducing overall system complexity while enhancing adaptability
Solution Approach 2:
The patent segments the determination process into distinct functional modules: EEG signal acquisition, frequency component extraction, IFFT transformation, template creation, and pattern matching. This modular segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently and simplifies the overall device architecture while enabling versatile determination capabilities
Data Source
AI summary
In each trial, brain electrical activity at multiple points of a target person is measured. An acquirer of a determination device acquires response matrices for n trials under a first condition and response matrices form trials under a second condition. An analyzer performs canonical correlation analysis on the acquired response matrices to obtain first canonical variable time series. A distance calculator calculates a distance between the trials from the obtained first canonical variable time series to obtain a distance matrix. A determiner obtains a possibility that the n trials and the m trials are classified into two different clusters from the distance matrix and determines whether the first condition and the second condition are substantially different. It is possible to provide to a single target person a first content in n trials and a second content in m trials so as to determine a difference in interest of the single target person. It is possible to provide the same content to a first subject who is the target person in n trials and to a second subject who is the target person in m trials so as to determine whether the two are different or the same.