The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

109 protocols using matlab r2012b

1

Baseline Wander Removal from Signals

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Before the signal is processed, baseline wander is first removed with a linear phase high-pass filter using a Kaiser window of 1.016 sec, with a cut-off frequency of 0.8 Hz and a side-lobe attenuation of 30 dB (van Alsté et al. 1986 (link)). The coefficients of the impulse response were determined by computer-aided filter design with the software Matlab R2012b (The MathWorks Inc., Massachusetts).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

EEG Data Pre-processing and Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
EEG data were processed using EEGLAB61 (link) (Swartz Center for Computational Neurosciences, La Jolla, CA: http://www.sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab) running under MATLAB R2012b (Mathworks, Navick, MA). Pre-processing was performed as follows. EEG data were re-referenced offline to linked mastoids. Bad channels were then identified by visual inspection and excluded from processing. Epochs for each stimulus type were extracted from −2000 to +7000 ms with respect to the first stimulus in each sequence, and were inspected for non-stereotyped artifacts and removed if present (9.55% ± 3.99 of trials removed). Stereotyped artifacts, including blinks, eye movements and muscle artifacts were deleted via independent component analysis (ICA) using the extended infomax algorithm62 (link). The average number of independent components removed was 3.33 (±0.98 SD). The remaining components were then projected back into electrode space. After ICA, channels that were deemed bad were reintroduced by interpolating data between neighbouring electrodes using spherical spline interpolation63 (link). The average number of trials per condition was 96.91 (±9.41 SD). Finally, EEG data were transformed using a surface Laplacian filter (smoothing = 10−5, number of iterations = 10, spherical spline order = 4) to reduce volume conduction effects in EEG electrode space (CSD Toolbox64 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Water Environment Capacity Calculation Model

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To calculate the WEC of each element with limited data, a simple and proper computation model is needed. In this study, a section control method (that has been one of the most frequently used algorithms) was adopted that can be expressed as Equation (11) [37 (link)], where ql (average discharge flow from the l th outfall) was far less than Q (reach designed flow of element i ). The simplified model can be expressed using Equation (12).
Wi=Qi(CSiC0i)+QiCSi(ekiti1)+l=1nqlCsi+Csil=1nql(ekiti1),
Wi=Qi(CSiC0i)+QiCSi(ekiti1),
where Wi , CSi , and C0i represent the water environmental capacity, the target concentration of the water quality, and the actual concentration of the pollutant of element i , respectively; ki is the degradation coefficient of the pollutant in element i , and ti is the time consuming of flowing through the element i .
Eventually, the contamination concentration and WEC of each calculated element i was simulated through the one-dimensional pollutant-water response model mentioned above. The calculation procedure of all models was programmed using MATLAB R2012b (version 8.0, The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

EEG Signal Acquisition and Preprocessing

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The EEG signals were recorded using a Neuro Scan NuAmps Express system (Compumedics USA Inc., Charlotte, NC, USA) with 32-channels EEG cap, as shown in Figure 2. All EEG signals were examined using EEGLAB software (10.2.2.4b Version, UC San Diego, Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience (SCCN), La Jolla, CA, USA) and MATLAB R2012b (The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USA) [10 (link)]. In EEG cap, all 32-channels were positioned according to the international 10–20 system. The EEG signals were acquired at a sampling frequency rate of 500 Hz. We use an infinite impulse response (IIR) filter to eliminate linear trends in EEG signals. The EEG signals were filtered with a 1–50 Hz band pass IIR filter. The filter configuration was set to 1 Hz high pass and 50 Hz low pass to eliminate high frequency noise. The EEG signals that were considerably contaminated by artifacts, such as muscle activity, eye blinking, eye movement, and environmental noise were first removed manually and then by independent component analysis (ICA) to minimize their influence on the analysis of the EEG signal. In the artifact removal analysis, we found that about 12% of the epochs (trials) were so noisy in the raw EEG signals. Consequently, 12% noisy epochs were rejected from the raw EEG signal. We removed various artifacts, like muscle activities and eye blinking [10 (link),20 (link),21 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

EEG Data Preprocessing and Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data were down-sampled to 1000 Hz and filtered using a windowed since type I linear phase FIR filter (band pass: IAF ± 3.5 Hz, filter order: 6002) and did not induce a phase shift in the alpha range (6–14 Hz). The identical filter was used for the stimulation signal and the EEG data (Widmann and Schröger, 2012 (link)). Filtered EEG data are shown in Figure 3 (Box 2). For each condition, the first and last 2 s were discarded, since the steady-state condition has to build up and to avoid edge effects (Halbleib et al., 2012 (link)). All analysis steps were performed in MATLAB R2012b (The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USA) and EEGLAB 11.0.4.3 (Delorme and Makeig, 2004 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Simulating CT Slice Thickness Impact on DVHs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We used a plug-in to CERR to obtain DVHs for various CT slice thicknesses. In a treatment planning system, DVHs for a given structure is in general obtained from information that can be found in the CT grid. In order to simulate the effect of varying CT slice thicknesses in CERR, we created pseudo CT slices using the information from the originally acquired inter-slice spacing (512×512 pixels). For AUH, the images were acquired by a multi-slice Philips Mx8000 IDT16 CT (slice thickness: 3 mm; in-slice pixel resolution: 0.98×0.98 mm2). For BCCA, images were acquired with a single-slice Philips PQ2000 CT (slice thickness: 5 mm; in-slice pixel resolution: 0.94×0.94 mm2). Dose and structure contours were then interpolated onto these pseudo slices, using linear interpolation to the nearest neighboring voxel, and used to calculate the corresponding DVHs. The original dose grid was 2 mm. Pseudo-slices were created at 3 or 5 mm, depending on the original inter-slice spacing, and at 7, 9, 11 and 13 mm. The DVHs in CERR were then exported with a bin-width of 0.2 Gy and further processed in MATLAB (MATLAB R2012b version 8.0.0.78, The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Brain Volumetric Analysis Pipeline

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The processing of the structural brain volume images was conducted using SPM12b software (Statistical Parametric Mapping, https://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/), implemented in Matlab R2012b (The MathWorks Inc.). We used the unified segmentation approach [39 (link)] to segment grey matter, white matter, and cerebrospinal fluid. Volumes were further assessed for total grey matter, total white matter, total brain tissue (grey + white matter), and total intracranial volume (TIV: grey + white matter +cerebrospinal fluid). The Freesurfer image analysis suite version 5.1 (Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard-Massachusetts Institute of Technology) was used to measure hippocampal volume through automatic volumetric segmentation as previously described [40 (link)]. WMH were manually delineated on the FLAIR images [41 (link)].
All volumes were corrected for TIV using the analysis of covariance approach [42 (link)]. Total brain tissue volume was used for the creation of global models, whereas grey- and white-matter volumes, hippocampal volume, and WMH volume were used in forming the specific models.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

SPM12-based fMRI Data Preprocessing

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
I used SPM12 (Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology) implemented in MATLAB R2012b (The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, USA) for data preprocessing and GLM. Each participant underwent four fMRI-runs, each comprising 477 volumes. After having discarded the first four volumes of each run, all images were corrected for head movements. Slice-acquisition delays were corrected using the middle slice as reference. All images were normalized to the standard SPM12 EPI template, resampled to 2 mm isotropic voxel size, and spatially smoothed using an isotropic Gaussian kernel of 8 mm FWHM. Time series at each voxel for each participant were high-pass filtered at 220 s and pre-whitened by means of autoregressive model AR(1).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Bioluminescence Imaging of Tissue

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
LRI utilizes a 10 × 10 × 0.5 mm CdWO4 scintillator crystal (MTI Corporation), which is in contact with the tissue of interest, to convert ionizing radiation from emitted beta particles of tracers in the tissue into visible-range photons detectable in a sensitive microscope. The collected photons pass through a wound fiber bundle (IG-567, Schott AG) and are mapped onto a camera chip via a relaying lens (Schott AG). The wound fiber bundle allows motion of the imaging tip while the camera stays in place. The fiber bundle has a 40% transmission between 500 and 1200 nm, a numerical aperture of 0.63, and length 1.720 m. The 5 by 6.7 mm fiber bundle has 10 μm elements in a 6 × 6 array. The camera is a EMCCD (ProEM, Princeton Instruments, Trenton, NJ) with a 512 × 512 imaging chip with a pixel size of 16 μm. The imaging setup yields a visible field of view of 4.80 × 6.51 mm with 407 × 300 pixels. Images were analyzed using Matlab R2012b (Mathworks).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

MALDI-TOF MS Salivary Proteome Profiling

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The raw MALDI-TOF MS spectra were processed in Matlab R2012b using the Mathworks bioinformatics tool box (MathWorks, Natick, MA, U.S.A). The workflow consisted of spectra resampling followed by baseline subtraction, smoothing and normalization of the total area under the curve (i.e. normalizing based on the total amount of sample protein ionized per spectrum). Normalization for total area under the curve insures that differences in saliva sample protein concentration, or in the protein concentration of the spotted sample, are compensated for. Reference spectra were used to align batches of spectra analyzed on different days and to compensate for inter-session instrument drift. Duplicate spectra were then averaged into one sample spectrum. Subsequently, peak detection was performed, followed by peak binning (peak coalescing) using a hierarchical clustering algorithm to calculate a common m/z reference peak vector. The final result was a 3-dimensional database of salivary peptide profiles consisting of sample ID’s, peak m/z values, and peak intensities. Peak identification was attempted using MALDI-MS/MS or by matching the peak m/z ratios to literature values from previous studies [19 (link), 20 (link)]. The spectra processing workflow is exemplified in S1 Fig.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!