Frontiers in Health Informatics www.ijmi.

ir
2024; 13: 183 Open Access

Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with
linear complexity
Somayeh Zeini1 , Seyed Enayatallah Alavi1* , Karim Ansari Asl2
1Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
2Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article type: Introduction: In this specific research study, a remarkably accurate and
Research significantly simplified approach has been presented.

Material and Methods: This research is encompasses three crucial stages.

Article History:
Firstly, the length of the signal is effectively diminished to an optimal
Received: 2023-10-19
Accepted: 2024-01-14
magnitude through the utilization of a technique widely known as
Published: 2024-02-03 windowing. This technique plays a pivotal role in reducing the signal to an
ideal size, ensuring the subsequent stages are executed with utmost
* Corresponding author: precision. Secondly, the pertinent features are extracted from the shortened
Seyed Enayatallah Alavi signal, specifically focusing on the Fractal Dimension, the Hurst Exponent,
and the Ratio of Determinism to Recurrence Rate. These features are chosen
Department of Computer due to the inherent nonlinear nature of the signal, as they provide valuable
Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, insights into the complex patterns and structures present within. Lastly, the
Shahid Chamran University of extracted features undergo Logistic Regression, a widely employed
Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
classification algorithm, to effectively categorize and classify them. This step
Email: se.alavi@scu.ac.ir plays a crucial role in providing a clear and concise understanding of the
underlying characteristics of the signal.

Keywords: Results: The implementation of the proposed method not only achieves an
Nonlinear Features outstanding accuracy rate of 99.66%, but it also exhibits a linear time
Logistic Regression complexity, ensuring efficient processing. Additionally, this method leads to
Epilepsy Detection a significant reduction in the length of EEG signals, which is of utmost
Linear Complexity importance in practical applications.

Conclusion: The primary objective of this proposed method revolves

around the introduction of an online approach that can seamlessly integrate
into healthcare systems. This objective is derived from a comprehensive
analysis and evaluation of the obtained results, ensuring the method's
practicality and effectiveness are thoroughly assessed.

Cite this paper as:

Zeini S, Alavi SE, Ansari Asl K. Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear
complexity. Front Health Inform. 2024; 13: 183. DOI: 10.30699/fhi.v13i0.535

INTRODUCTION Ictal) and the activities during the seizures (Ictal). An

According to the World Health Organization
estimation, epilepsy is the most common
neurological disorder which 60 million of people in
the word have [1]. This disease is specified by brief
disruption of perception or behavior arising from
excessive synchronization of cortical neural network.
The original sign of epilepsy is repeated unprovoked
seizures. Electrical activity of the brain is evident in
the electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. Therefore,
the EEG signal is the most useful signal using in brain
clinical assessment and epilepsy detection. The
epileptic EEG signals submit in two state of abnormal
activities between two sequential seizures (Inter-
experienced neurologist can detect the step of
epilepsy by visual inspection of long duration of EEG
signals. Neurologist detection is prolix, tiresome and
intellectual. Therefore, an automatic system, which
could detect accurate between normal, inter-ictal and
ictal EEG signals is used for epilepsy detection.
The proposed methods for epilepsy detection is
divided to two general categories: two class problem
(normal and epilepsy) [2-4] and three class problem
(normal, inter-ictal and ictal). In order to risk
prevention for epileptic people, it is better to detect
the step of disease. Therefore, three class epilepsy
detection has more importance and difficulty.

Copyright© 2024, Published by Frontiers in Health Informatics. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International (CC BY) License (http://creativecommons.org/).
 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity
The main EEG analysis methods are time domain,
frequency domain, time–frequency domain, and
nonlinear methods. Among these methods, nonlinear
methods and time–frequency related techniques
resulted in higher accuracies [5]. Multiple nonlinear
methods have been suggested because of nonlinear
nature of EEG signals. Guler et al. used largest
lyapunov exponent (LLE) as a feature in a feed-
forward neural network and recurrent neural
network (RNN). RNN resulted better accuracy 96%
[6]. Ghosh-Dastidar et al. also used nonlinear
features: standard deviation, fractal dimension and
largest lyapunov exponent given from wavelet
decomposition of EEG signals into alpha, beta, delta,
theta and gamma sub-bands. Mixed-band feature
have been resulted 96.7% accuracy in Levenberg–
Marquardt back propagation neural network [7].
Nonlinear features based on high order spectra,
approximate entropy, sample entropy, fractal
dimension and Hurst exponent were extracted from
EEG segments of 6 seconds duration by Acharya et al.
These features are leading to 99.7% accuracy in fuzzy
classifier [8]. They also decomposed segments of EEG
into wavelet coefficients by wavelet packet
decomposition (WPD), and then they extracted
eigenvalues from the wavelet coefficients by using
PCA. These features resulted accuracy of 99% in
gaussian mixture model (GMM) [9]. Orhan et al.
decomposed EEG signals into constitutive frequency
sub-bands using discrete wavelet transform. They
calculated probability distribution for each sub-band
by K nearest neighbor (KNN). Afterward these
outputs fed to a multilayer perceptron neural
network and detect the steps of epilepsy by an
accuracy equal to 96.67% [10].
Explained methods and many other methods have
been focused on accuracy increase. Many of two class
methods obtained this goal but in three class
problems, it is more complex because of resemblance
between inter-ictal and ictal signals. New methods,
which we explained, reached higher accuracy in
classification but those methods have high time and
computational complexity. Although machine
learning algorithms are very successful in seizure
detection, the biggest shortcomings are the need of
training and the relatively high computational cost
[11]. To use an epilepsy detection method in health
care systems, we should reached both accuracy
increase and complexity decrease. Some novel
methods try to aim both goals, which we discuss here.
Kolekar et al. extracted Symbolic entropy, Lempel-Ziv
complexity and sample entropy and used LSSVM
classifier. Low computational complexity and more
accuracy for real time epileptic seizure detection are
the main advantages of their suggested method. Their
reason for low computational complexity is that it
isn’t necessary to decompose the EEG signal and the
highest accuracy they achieved is 90% [12]. In
another work with fast computing and low
Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024
Somayeh Zeini et al.
complexity the DD-DWT is explored to decompose
EEG signals into numerous details at various
resolutions. Then tow extracted features HE and
FuzzyEn from decomposed EEG signals fed to
support vector machine which is optimized by Li et al.
and gained low computational efficiency and 99.6%
accuracy in this method [13]. Aldabbagh et al.
presents a low computational complexity algorithm
for two class epilepsy classification. They use a
combination of a finite impulse response (FIR) filter
to smooth out the signal and a signal thresholding
step to detect abnormal segments. The system has
been tested on seven subjects each with more than 25
hours of recorded data, resulting in an average
sensitivity of 97% [14].
Such methods try to decrease computational
complexity and increase detection accuracy. High
accuracy was obtained in multiple works but
decreasing complexity is more difficult. All the
researches with low computation use accurate
classifiers with low complexity but we also reduce
EEG signal length to speed up all the other phases
processing.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Data
The EEG dataset used in this study belong to
Department of Epileptology of Bonn University that is
available at their website. The database consists of
five subsets marked as A, B, C, D, and E. Each subset
contains 100 single channel EEG segments of 23.6 s
duration, which are sampled at the rate of 173.61 Hz
and passed from 0.53–40 Hz Band-pass filter. Also, all
EEG signals were recorded by the 128-channel
amplifier system with a common average reference
and digitized at 12-bit A/D resolution [15]. Sets A and
B include EEG segments recordings belong to five
healthy persons using a standardized electrode
placement scheme (Fig 1). The eyes of persons of set
A were open and they were awake and the eyes of
persons of set B were closed. Sets C, D, and E were
from EEG archive of pre-surgical diagnosis. Sets C and
D contained brain activities between successive
seizures and set E includes brain activities during
seizures [16]. We implemented our suggested
method using Matlab 2012a and R.
Fig 1: The international 10-20 system
Page 2 of 9
 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity
Method
Block diagram of our suggested algorithm is shown in
Fig 2. Intended algorithm consists of two separate
parts: offline and online. In online part we reduce EEG
signal length and train an artificial system by
appropriate features extracted from them, afterward
we test the system in offline part.
Fig 2: Block diagram of suggested method
Reducing EEG length by windowing
The main goal of this phase is reducing EEG signal
length, increasing all the next phases speed and
decreasing time complexity as a result. Biomedical
signals such as EEG are named non-stationary signal
i.e., its statistical characteristics change over the time
[17]. When we divide signal to shorter segments, the
structure variations through the segments is
facilitated as they have less static variations
compared to the original signal [18]. There are two
types of segmentation for non-stationary signals:
fixed-size segmentation and adaptive segmentation.
Fixed-size segmentations is simple and window
length doesn’t change, while adaptive size
segmentation segmented signals into variable parts
of different statistical properties and is more difficult
and accurate [19]. After segmentation each segment
of signal is considered statistically stationary, usually
with similar time and frequency statistics [20]. In the
case where the windows are placed in a segment,
their statistical properties do not differ [19].
Statistical features don’t change in that time period
and we can assume the signal as static signal in that
time period. We used fixed-size segmentation, so the
length of segment which we can assume it static is
exclusive for each signal. So it’s necessary to compute
the length of window for each person.
Several recent references used FD changes for EEG
signal edge detection because FD shows statistical
changes well [19, 21, 22]. In this step, two sequential
windows with primary minimum length are slid
along the EEG signal. For each window, FD is
computed using the Katz algorithm. Fractal
dimension of the signal shows any variation on the
signal characteristics. Therefore, we use FD changes
to detect segments edges. The following G function
calculates changes between two sequential windows,
Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024
Somayeh Zeini et al.
so it may be positive or negative. We use absolute
value of G because the change value is important but
sign of change doesn’t matter.
G  [G , G , ..., G ]
1 2 M 1
G | FD  FD | i  1, ..., M  1
i i 1 i (1)
Where m is number of windows. As mentioned
before, the signal segment is assumed to have the
same statistical features along a segment. Therefore,
a similar FD should be calculated from the sliding
windows through a segment (normal, ictal or inter-
ictal segment) and two different fractal dimensions
should be calculated from the windows of two
different segments. For the windows in a same
segment, G value should be small and it should be
large for windows on the segment edge. To find
optimal length the G function should be threshold. An
energy function is defined as EG for solving this:
| G l
i
|
2
EG  i
l
k (2)
Where k is the number of samples in Gl. G to the
second power is used to bold the changes. Finally, we
use k term in the denominator to normalize energy
and eliminate effect of samples number. If window
length is small, more segments are created through
segmentation, so more G values are calculated and
large value of energy function does not come from
more changes rather it comes from summation of a
lot of G value. Segments edges may miss by large
window length, in other hand the window length
should be minimum to obtain the best decreeing in
signal length. It is obvious that value of energy
function decrease continuous by increasing window
length. So energy function is calculated for different
window length and the length corresponding to
average of energy function has been selected as
optimal window length.
Applying window on the signal segment
After finding window length, we convert the signal
segment to a shorter segment which no sample of the
original signal doesn’t omit, rather the shortened
signal segment consist of the average of original
signal samples. We divide an EEG signal segment with
n
n sample length to shorter segments with l sample
l
length and in each sub-segment with l sample length we
replace average of containing samples in that sub-
segment.
X  {x1 , x 2 ,..., x n }
(3)
il

i  ( i 1)*l 1
Xi
Y  {y1 , y 2 ,..., y n l | yi  }
l
By reducing the signal segment length, all processing
Page 3 of 9
 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity Somayeh Zeini et al.

are facilitating and time complexity will reduce
significantly, because the most important
parameter in the processing is signal length.
Feature extraction
Since the biologic signals of body as EEG has
nonlinear nature, we use nonlinear features to
describe them. Used features in this paper are HE, FD
and Ratio and feature vector has been made up from
extracting these three features from Y vector.
Fractal dimension (FD)
Fractal Dimension is a measure which could model
complex and irregular biological time signals and
analyze nonlinear behavior or of data [23]. If we
consider EEG signal as time sequence
k
x(1), x(2),.. x(n) , time series x m has been made as
following equation:
Ratio of recurrence quantification analysis
Recurrence plot is a two-dimensional visual diagram
which shows recurrence states. It could find hidden
periodicity in time domain which isn’t visible easily
and measures non-stationary of a signal. If xi is the ith
point in m dimensional orbit and xj is close enough to
xi, thus a point will stay on location (i,j). The points
are along i=j diagonal symmetrically. The recurrence
quantification analysis (RQA) is a method of
nonlinear data analysis which quantifies the number
and duration of recurrences of a dynamical system
presented by its state space trajectory [30]. There are
several parameters which could extract from
recurrence plot and use for EEG analysis [31-33]. We
use ratio measure among the measures could extract
from recurrence plot which is ratio between
determinism (DET) and recurrence rate (RR) and is
giving by:
N

 lp (l)
l  l min
N m (4) DET 
x km  {x(m), x(m  k), x(m  2 k),.., x([ ]k)} N
k  R(i, j)
ij 1
(8)
Where m  1, 2,.., k and shows initial time value and k
shows discrete time distance between points. Lm(K)
k Classification
length is calculating for x and each of k time series
m

as follow: After extraction appropriate features from Y vector

[a]
 | x(m ik)  x(m (i 1) k) | (N 1)
L m (k)  i 1
[a]k
Where n is length of x series. A diagram of log(Lm(k))
across log(1/k) is drawn and FD is estimated from
slope of least squares of line which has best
symmetry on the diagram. In other words, FD is
calculated from following equation:
FD  log(L m (k)) log( 1 )
k Logistic regression is a statistical model for binary
Fractal dimension has been used in multiple
researches of epilepsy detection [24-26].
Hurst exponent (H)
Hurst exponent is a mathematical measure which
used to evaluate the long-memory dependence and
its degree in a time series. The Hurst exponent, H,
discuss smoothness of time series [27] and it is given
by:
and forming feature vector for each signal, the
(5)
correspandig class lable (normal, inter-ictal or ictal)
has been attached to feature vector. The feature
vector has been fed to logistic regression classifier.
Then detection system is learning and performance
measures namely accuracy, inter-ictal and ictal class
sensivity, normal class specifity and time complexity
are extracting to evaluate our work and the results
will compare with last works.
Logistic regression
(6)
classification; also, it can be developed for multi-class
classification [34]. Logistic function define as
following:
1
g(z)  z
(9)
1e
Probability of pertaining a sample to a class could
calculate from following equation:
n

exp(k   k X i )
0 i

log(R S ) (7) p (y  y k | x)  i 1
k R (10)
H  R 1 n

log(N) 1   exp( j    ji X i )
0
j 1 i 1

1
Where N is time of data samples and R is difference p (y  y k | x)  R 1 n
k R
1   exp( j    ji X i )
between maximum and minimum of mean devition. j 1
0
i 1

Hurst exponent is also estimated by drawing the

diagram of (R/S) across N in log-log axis. Hurst
exponent is one of nonlinear features which is useful Where  is weight, which obtain from maximum
for seizure detection [28, 29]. probability estimation:

Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024 Page 4 of 9

 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity Somayeh Zeini et al.

MCLE  arg max  P (Y l |,X ) for i  1 to n

l

(11) il

i
Complexity of logistic regression is O(kn) where k is
number of iterations to gain optimal condition and
Fig 3 shows how to decide about sample x.
Fig 3: Logistic regression classifier
Subasi et al. used LBDWT coefficients of EEG signals
as an input to logistic regression with two discrete
outputs: epileptic seizure or non-epileptic seizure.
Logistic regression works as powerful as MLNP
classifier [34]. They used multiple signal
classification (MUSIC), autoregressive (AR) and
periodogram methods to get power spectra in
patients with absence seizure. Two classifiers:
logistic regression and artificial neural network have
been fed by power spectra and ANN resulted more
accurate than LR [35].
Time complexity
Complexity of method is complexity of online part
and this part consists of 3 sequential steps: 1)
reducing EEG length, 2) feature extraction and 3)
classification.
Step 1) For reducing EEG length we replace every l
sample of original signal with average of them and
complexity of this step is O(n).

Xi
i  ( i 1)*l 1
yi 
l (12)
Step 2) we extract FD, H and DET of the signal. Time
complexity of the algorithms which we use to
calculate these features are all O(n) [36-38].
Step 3) Complexity of logistic regression classifier is
linear [39]. Therefore, we calculate time complexity
of proposed method as follow:
O method  O step 1  O step 2  O step 3
O step 1  O (n )
O step 2  O FD  O H  O DET  O (n )  O (n )  O (n )  O (n )
O step 3  O LR  O (kn)  O (n )
O method  O (n ) (13)
RESULTS
Algorithm runs on a system with windows 7
operating system with 2.53 (GHz) CPU. As mentioned
before energy function is calculated for different
window length and the length corresponding to
average of energy function has been selected as
optimal window length. Different values of energy
function for different window length and average of
them are shown in Table 1. It shows decreasing
energy function by increasing window length and
window length corresponding to average of energy
function is near to 20. It should be noted that window
length of every patient signal is unique and calculates
once in offline system. If we choose window length
very small, any significant decreasing occur in signal
length. On the other hand large window length result
missing segment edges and reduce accuracy of
epilepsy detection. So selecting window length is
trade-off between accuracy and decreasing EEG
length. An example of original signal of each class and
corresponding shortened signal is given in Fig 4.

Table 1: Energy function values corresponding different window length

Window
length 5 10 20 40 60 80 100 Average
Signal
Normal 1 0.30 0.103 0.031 0.01 0.006 0.0041 0.0037 0.0454
Normal 2 0.22 0.13 0.037 0.008 0.005 0.0042 0.0025 0.0381
Normal 3 0.358 0.131 0.038 0.016 0.012 0.006 0.0031 0.050
Inter-ictal 1 0.5 0.252 0.081 0.045 0.023 0.013 0.011 0.102
Inter-ictal 2 0.41 0.169 0.049 0.013 0.010 0.0092 0.0054 0.075
Inter-ictal 3 0.69 0.211 0.076 0.026 0.022 0.0158 0.0090 0.0119
Ictal 1 0.23 0.12 0.029 0.01 0.004 0.0053 0.0035 0.038
Ictal 2 0.42 0.13 0.070 0.023 0.01 0.011 0.0087 0.079
Ictal 3 0.288 0.134 0.054 0.012 0.011 0.0082 0.0042 0.056

Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024 Page 5 of 9

 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity Somayeh Zeini et al.

Original signal Shortened signal

Normal

Inter-ictal

ictal

Fig 4: Original signal of each class and their shortened signal

After reducing EEG signal length, three nonlinear Table 2: Values of FD, H and Ratio for each class
features expressed above (FD, H and Ratio) extracted
from them. Table 2 shows the results of these
Features Normal Inter-ictal Ictal
features for normal, inter-ictal and ictal EEG signals
shown in Fig 4. It is evident that features are different FD 1.386 1.576 1.906
for each class. H 0.365 0.418 0.365
Ratio 143.12 164.31 195.05

Table 3: Results of evaluation measures on original signals

Classifier Accuracy Normal specifity Inter-ictal sensivity Ictal sensivity Complexity Time
Logistic Regression 100% 100% 100% 100% O(n) 0.9

Table 4: Results of evaluation measures on shortened signals

Classifier Accuracy Normal specifity Inter-ictal sensivity Ictal sensivity Complexity Time
Logistic Regression 99.66% 100% 100% 100% O(n) 0.56

complexity. Also, the way we describe to decrease

In this stage, feature vector of each sample has been
made from combination of features and its class label.
Then logistic regression has been trained and tested
by both original signals and shortened signals and
their results are compared. Five measures told before
and needed time for processing a signal in online
system (in seconds) calculate and given for
evaluation of original signals classification in Table 3
and our method in Table 4.
As you see in Table 3 and 4 better results have been
obtained on original EEG signals and it’s evident
because no data miss in original EEG signals. Logistic
regression has high accuracy and low complexity. Our
suggested classifier, logistic regression, is linear and
can use in online care system. Its classification
accuracy is acceptable and its low misclassification
error (0.33%) can be waivered to obtain linear
signal length influence all processes and increase
processing speed.
DISCUSSION
Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder
characterized by recurrent unprovoked seizures
resulted from abnormal, excessive and hyper
synchronous neuronal activity in brain [40].
Electroencephalogram (EEG) is the recording of
electrical activity of the brain [41]. EEG is the most
useful signal for epilepsy detection. In recent works,
researchers achieved accurate methods which detect
epilepsy with high precision. It’s the time to work on
other important factors like complexity and detection
speed because care systems should analyze a lot of
EEG signals as fast as possible.

Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024 Page 6 of 9

 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity Somayeh Zeini et al.

In this paper we try to classify EEG signals to detect detection, low complexity, high speed and high
epilepsy with low complexity, high speed and high accuracy. In previous works, researchers obtained
accuracy. To obtain high accuracy goal, we choose high accuracy or low complexity but none of their
nonlinear features namely FD, H and Ratio to discuss classifiers is linear. Table 5 compare recent
EEG dynamic signals well. For two other goals, we important works with our method.
reduce signal length to speed up all next processes
In comparison these works to our method, accuracy
and choose an optimal classifier which has low
of methods suggested by Guler [6], Ghosh-Dastidar
complexity named logistic regression. EEG signals
[7], Orhan [10] and Kolekar [12] are not acceptable
length reduce from n samples to n/l samples where l
because high accurate methods have been developed
is window length calculate by mentioned method and
by other researchers and us. Acharya [9] could detect
is individual for each person. Windowing affects
epilepsy by high accuracy (99.7% and 99%) but
speed of whole system and reduce duration of offline
complexity of fuzzy classifier is high and not
part of system from 0.9 seconds to 0.54 seconds.
acceptable while GMM is linear and appropriate for
Logistic regression classifier has low complexity
online systems. Li et al. [13] also developed high
O(n). Linear complexity of logistic regression make
accurate epilepsy detection system with better
the detection system appropriate for online care
computational efficiency in comparison to SVM but
system.
not to a linear classifier.
Our method benefits as mentioned above are linear

Table 5: Summary of previous works and our method

Author Features Classifier Accuracy Complexity

Guler [6] LLE RNN 96% O(n)<-<O(n2)
Back propagation
Ghosh-Dastidar [7] mix-band feature space 96.7% O(n)<-<O(n2)
neural network
Sample Entropy, apen, HOS, FD,
Acharya [8] Fuzzzy 99.7% O(n2)<-<O(n3)
Hurst
PCA eigenvalues from WPD
Acharya [9] GMM 99% O(n)
coefficients
K-means cluster on DWT of
Orhan [10] MLPNN 96.67% O(n)<-<O(n2)
signals
Symbolic entropy, Lempel-Ziv
Kolekar [12] LS-SVM 90% O(n2)<-<O(n3)
complexity, sample entropy
Fuzzy Entropy and H from DD-
Li [13] GA-SVM 99.6% O(n2)<-<O(n3)
DWT on signals
Our method FD, H, Ratio Logistic Regression 99.66% O(n)

them by linear complexity, our suggested method is

CONCLUSION
Because epilepsy is a dangerous disease with
unpredictable onset, high accurate epilepsy detection
at possible minimum time is an important challenge.
In this article we propose a novel method for epilepsy
detection that high accuracy, low time complexity,
linear classification, high speed and online detection
are its most important features which can be
mentioned. For increasing detection speed and
decreasing time complexity we shorten the signals by
windowing them with individual window length.
Since time complexity depend on data size directly,
decreasing signal length decrease time complexity
significantly. Fractal dimension, Hurst and Ratio are
three nonlinear features which extract from EEG
signals because they could discuss nonlinear signals
well. Feature vector fed to logistic regression
classifiers and result 99.66% accuracy. Amount of
miss data from shortened signals is not noticeable
and it doesn’t influence on method accuracy.
According to reducing signal length and classifying
appropriate for using in health care systems. We find
window length by trial and error method for each
person, as future works we plan to use adaptive
windowing by wavelet or fractal dimension to reduce
signal length more. Also, windowing method could
apply on long term signals or we could test our
method for seizure onset prediction. An important
aspect for seizure onset detection is latency, the delay
between the actual seizure onset and the onset
detection [42]. According to linearity of LR and
reducing signal length we expect latency near to zero.
AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION
All authors contributed to the literature review,
design, data collection and analysis, drafting the
manuscript, read and approved the final manuscript.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding
the publication of this study.

Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024 Page 7 of 9

 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
No financial interests related to the material of this
manuscript have been declared.
REFERENCES
1. World Health Organization. Epilepsy [Internet]. 2012
[cited: 10 Aug 2023]. Available from:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs999
/en/
2. Guo L, Rivero D, Dorado J, Munteanu CR, Pazos A.
Automatic feature extraction using genetic
programming: An application to epileptic EEG
classification. Expert Systems with Applications.
2011; 38(8): 10425-36.
3. Wang D, Miao D, Xie C. Best basis-based wavelet
packet entropy feature extraction and hierarchical
EEG classification for epileptic detection. Expert
Systems with Applications. 2011; 38(11): 14314-20.
4. Iscan Z, Dokur Z, Demiralp T. Classification of
electroencephalogram signals with combined time
and frequency features. Expert Systems with
Applications. 2011; 38(8): 10499-505.
5. Acharya UR, Sree SV, Swapna G, Martis RJ, Suri JS.
Automated EEG analysis of epilepsy: A review.
Knowledge-Based Systems. 2013; 45: 147-65.
6. Guler NF, Übeyli ED, Güler I. Recurrent neural
networks employing Lyapunov exponents for EEG
signals classification. Expert Systems with
Applications. 2005; 29(3): 506-14.
7. Ghosh-Dastidar S, Adeli H, Dadmehr N. Mixed-band
wavelet-chaos-neural network methodology for
epilepsy and epileptic seizure detection. IEEE Trans
Biomed Eng. 2007; 54(9): 1545-51. PMID: 17867346
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2007.891945 [PubMed]
8. Acharya UR, Sree SV, Ang PC, Yanti R, Suri JS.
Application of non-linear and wavelet based features
for the automated identification of epileptic EEG
signals. Int J Neural Syst. 2012; 22(2): 1250002. PMID:
23627588 DOI: 10.1142/S0129065712500025
[PubMed]
9. Acharya UR, Sree SV, Alvin AP, Suri JS. Use of principal
component analysis for automatic classification of
epileptic EEG activities in wavelet framework. Expert
Systems with Applications. 2012; 39(10): 9072-8.
10. Orhan U, Hekim M, Ozer M. EEG signals classification
using the K-means clustering and a multilayer
perceptron neural network model. Expert Systems
with Applications. 2011; 38(10): 13475-81.
11. Wang H, Choy CS. Automatic seizure detection using
correlation integral with nonlinear adaptive
denoising and Kalman filter. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng
Med Biol Soc. 2016; 2016: 1002-5. PMID: 28268493
DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7590871 [PubMed]
12. Kolekar MH, Dash DP. A nonlinear feature based
epileptic seizure detection using least square support
vector machine classifier. IEEE Region 10 Conference.
IEEE; 2015.
Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024
Somayeh Zeini et al.
ETHICS APPROVAL
Not Applicable.
13. Li M, Chen W, Zhang T. Automatic epilepsy detection
using wavelet-based nonlinear analysis and
optimized SVM. Biocybernetics and Biomedical
Engineering. 2016; 36(4): 708-18.
14. Aldabbagh AM, Alshebeili SA, Alotaiby TN, Abd-
Elsamie FE. Low computational complexity EEG
epilepsy data classification algorithm for patients
with intractable seizures. International Conference on
Biomedical Engineering. IEEE; 2015.
15. EEG time series [Internet]. 2010 [cited: 15 Jan 2023].
Available from: http://www.meb.unibonn.
de/epileptologie/science/physik/eegdata.html
16. Andrzejak RG, Lehnertz K, Mormann F, Rieke C, David
P, Elger CE. Indications of nonlinear deterministic and
finite-dimensional structures in time series of brain
electrical activity: Dependence on recording region
and brain state. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter
Phys. 2001; 64(6 Pt 1): 061907. PMID: 11736210 DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevE.64.061907 [PubMed]
17. Azami H, Mohammadi K, Hassanpour H. An improved
signal segmentation method using genetic algorithm.
International Journal of Computer Applications. 2011;
29(8): 5-9.
18. Anisheh SM, Hassanpour H. Adaptive segmentation
with optimal window length scheme using fractal
dimension and wavelet transform. International
Journal of Engineering. 2009; 1(4): 5.
19. Azami H, Hassanpour H, Escudero J, Sanei S. An
intelligent approach for variable size segmentation of
non-stationary signals. J Adv Res. 2015; 6(5): 687-98.
PMID: 26425359 DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2014.03.004
[PubMed]
20. Sanei S, Chambers JA. EEG signal processing. John
Wiley & Sons; 2013.
21. Azami H, Sanei S. Automatic signal segmentation
based on singular spectrum analysis and imperialist
competitive algorithm. International eConference on
Computer and Knowledge Engineering. IEEE; 2012.
22. Azami H, Khosravi A, Malekzadeh M, Sanei S. A new
adaptive signal segmentation approach based on
Hiaguchi’s fractal dimension. International
Conference on Intelligent Computing. Springer; 2012.
23. Uthayakumar R. Fractal dimension in epileptic EEG
signal analysis. In: Banerjee S, Rondoni L (Eds).
Applications of Chaos and Nonlinear Dynamics in
Science and Engineering. Vol 3. Springer; 2013.
24. Zhang Y, Zhou W, Yuan S, Yuan Q. Seizure detection
method based on fractal dimension and gradient
boosting. Epilepsy Behav. 2015; 43: 30-8. PMID:
25549952 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.11.025
[PubMed]
25. El-Kishky A. Assessing entropy and fractal dimensions
as discriminants of seizures in EEG time series.
Page 8 of 9
 Using nonlinear features and logistic regression for epilepsy detection with linear complexity
International Conference on Information Science,
Signal Processing and their Applications. IEEE; 2012.
26. Kumar A, Kolekar MH. Machine learning approach for
epileptic seizure detection using wavelet analysis of
EEG signals. International Conference on Medical
Imaging, m-Health and Emerging Communication
Systems. IEEE; 2014.
27. Acharya R, Faust O, Kannathal N, Chua T,
Laxminarayan S. Non-linear analysis of EEG signals at
various sleep stages. Comput Methods Programs
Biomed. 2005; 80(1): 37-45. PMID: 16154231 DOI:
10.1016/j.cmpb.2005.06.011 [PubMed]
28. Kannathal N, Acharya UR, Lim CM, Sadasivan PK.
Characterization of EEG: A comparative study.
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2005; 80(1): 17-
23. PMID: 16099533 DOI:
10.1016/j.cmpb.2005.06.005 [PubMed]
29. Acharya UR, Chua CK, Lim TC, Dorithy, Suri JS.
Automatic identification of epileptic EEG signals using
nonlinear parameters. Journal of Mechanics in
Medicine and Biology. 2009; 9(04): 539-53.
30. Marwan N, Wessel N, Meyerfeldt U, Schirdewan A,
Kurths J. Recurrence-plot-based measures of
complexity and their application to heart-rate-
variability data. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter
Phys. 2002; 66(2 Pt 2): 026702. PMID: 12241313 DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevE.66.026702 [PubMed]
31. Acharya UR, Sree SV, Chattopadhyay S, Yu W, Ang PC.
Application of recurrence quantification analysis for
the automated identification of epileptic EEG signals.
Int J Neural Syst. 2011; 21(3): 199-211. PMID:
21656923 DOI: 10.1142/S0129065711002808
[PubMed]
32. Ngamga EJ, Bialonski S, Marwan N, Kurths J, Geier C,
Lehnertz K. Evaluation of selected recurrence
measures in discriminating pre-ictal and inter-ictal
periods from epileptic EEG data. Physics Letters A.
2016; 380(16): 1419-25.
33. Rabbi AF, Jaiswal MK, Lei S, Fazel-Rezai R. Changes in
dynamical characteristics of epileptic EEG in rats
using recurrence quantification analysis. Annu Int
Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2011; 2011: 2562-5.
Volume 13 | Article 183 | Feb 2024
Somayeh Zeini et al.
PMID: 22254864 DOI:
10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090708 [PubMed]
34. Subasi A, Ercelebi E. Classification of EEG signals using
neural network and logistic regression. Comput
Methods Programs Biomed. 2005; 78(2): 87-99.
PMID: 15848265 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2004.10.009
[PubMed]
35. Alkan A, Koklukaya E, Subasi A. Automatic seizure
detection in EEG using logistic regression and
artificial neural network. J Neurosci Methods. 2005;
148(2): 167-76. PMID: 16023730 DOI:
10.1016/j.jneumeth.2005.04.009 [PubMed]
36. Wong A, Wu L, Gibbons PB, Faloutsos C. Fast
estimation of fractal dimension and correlation
integral on stream data. Information Processing
Letters. 2005; 93(2): 91-7.
37. Racine R. Estimating the Hurst exponent. Zurich:
Mosaic Group; 2011.
38. Nguyen HD, Wilkins BA, Cheng Q, Benjamin BA. An
online sleep apnea detection method based on
recurrence quantification analysis. IEEE J Biomed
Health Inform. 2014; 18(4): 1285-93. PMID:
25014935 DOI: 10.1109/JBHI.2013.2292928
[PubMed]
39. Komarek P. Logistic regression for data mining and
high-dimensional classification. Robotics Institute,
Carnegie Mellon University; 2004.
40. Martis RJ, Acharya UR, Tan JH, Petznick A, Yanti R,
Chua CK, et al. Application of empirical mode
decomposition (EMD) for automated detection of
epilepsy using EEG signals. Int J Neural Syst. 2012;
22(6): 1250027. PMID: 23186276 DOI:
10.1142/S012906571250027X [PubMed]
41. Guo L, Rivero D, Pazos A. Epileptic seizure detection
using multiwavelet transform based approximate
entropy and artificial neural networks. J Neurosci
Methods. 2010; 193(1): 156-63. PMID: 20817036
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.08.030 [PubMed]
42. Khan AT, Husain I, Khan YU. Seizure onset patterns in
EEG and their detection using statistical measures.
Annual IEEE India Conference. IEEE; 2015.
Page 9 of 9