Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Med Eng Phys. 2014 May 17;36(7):975–980. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.04.003

Figure 3.

Figure 3

(a) and (b): comparison of the classification performance with incease of the number of raw EMG features selected by the MRF and SFS methods for TD and AR+RMS features, respectively. The SFS method was based on individual EMG recording channels. (c) and (d): comparison of the classification performance with incease of the number of EMG channels selected by the MRF and SFS methods for (c) TD and (d) AR+RMS features, respectively.