## 3 Experiments and Results
### New Combinations of Signals Using Four Common Methods
#### 3.3.5 Discussion of Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Methods** & **S1** & **S2** & **S3** & **S4** & **S5** & **S6** & **S7** & **S8** & **S9** & **Avg** & **Std** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline CSP (C3,C4,CZ) & 51.38 & 6.94 & 86.1 & 36.1 & 6.94 & 22.22 & 15.26 & 73.6 & 77.76 & 41.81 & 29.64 & - \\ CSP & 77.78 & 2.78 & 93.06 & 40.28 & 9.72 & 43.06 & 62.5 & 87.5 & 87.5 & 56.02 & 32.08 & 0.0125 \\ GLRCSP & 72.22 & 16.66 & 87.5 & 34.72 & 11.12 & 30.56 & 62.5 & 87.5 & 76.38 & 53.24 & 28.48 & 0.0275 \\ CCSP1 & 72.22 & 20.84 & 87.5 & 13.88 & \(-\)1.38 & 30.56 & 62.5 & 87.5 & 76.38 & 50 & 32.2 & 0.1230 \\ CCSP2 & 77.78 & 6.94 & 94.44 & 40.28 & 8.34 & 36.12 & 58.34 & 90.28 & 80.56 & 54.79 & 31.7 & 0.0125 \\ DLCSPauto & 77.78 & 2.78 & 93.06 & 40.28 & 13.88 & 43.06 & 63.88 & 87.5 & 87.5 & 56.64 & 31.47 & 0.0105 \\ DLCSPcv & 77.78 & 1.38 & 93.06 & 40.28 & 11.12 & 25 & 62.5 & 87.5 & 73.62 & 52.47 & 32.12 & 0.0460 \\ DLCSPcvdiff & 77.78 & 1.38 & 93.06 & 40.28 & 11.12 & 25 & 62.5 & 87.5 & 73.62 & 52.47 & 32.12 & 0.0460 \\ SSRCSP & 77.78 & 6.94 & 94.44 & 40.28 & 12.5 & 37.5 & 58.34 & **94.44** & 80.56 & 55.86 & 31.49 & 0.0080 \\ TRCSP & 77.78 & 8.34 & 93.06 & 41.66 & 25 & 34.72 & 62.5 & 91.74 & 83.34 & 57.57 & 29.41 & 0.0050 \\ WTRCSP & 77.78 & 9.72 & 93.06 & 40.28 & 31.94 & 23.62 & 62.5 & 91.66 & 81.94 & 56.94 & 29.52 & 0.0090 \\ SRCSP & 77.78 & 26.38 & 93.06 & 33.34 & 26.38 & 27.78 & 56.94 & 91.66 & **84.72** & 57.56 & 27.86 & 0.0035 \\ SCSP & 81.94 & 12.5 & 93.04 & 45.82 & 27.76 & 27.76 & 59.72 & 94.44 & 83.32 & 58.48 & 29.47 & 0.0030 \\ SCSP1 & **83.32** & 34.72 & 95.82 & 44.44 & 30.54 & 33.34 & **69.44** & 94.44 & 83.32 & 63.26 & 25.84 & 0.0015 \\ SCSP2 & **83.32** & 20.82 & 94.28 & 41.66 & 26.38 & 22.22 & 56.94 & 90.26 & 87.5 & 58.15 & 29.44 & 0.0030 \\ NCSCSP \({}^{1}\)\_ELM & 75.95 & **49.61** & 94.93 & 60.76 & **48.46** & 61.41 & 66.2 & 88.29 & 69.47 & 68.34 & 14.98 & 0.0260 \\ NCSCSP \({}^{1}\)\_KNN & 70.68 & 29.89 & 96.65 & 41.21 & 38.63 & 47.18 & 53.53 & 87.96 & 65.63 & 59.04 & 21.56 & 0.0045 \\ NCSCSP \({}^{1}\)\_LDA & 77.09 & 49.42 & **97.02** & **62.96** & 44.93 & **64.44** & 67.48 & 92.02 & 62.97 & **68.70** & 16.46 & 0.0020 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Evaluation of the best kappa results of different methods with the best accuracy of the average of the combined signals of the filter banks on the right- and left-hand sides. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Methods** & **S1** & **S2** & **S3** & **S4** & **S5** & **Avg** & **Std** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline CSP (C3,C4,CZ) & 8.56 & 60 & 10 & 40 & 74.28 & 38.57 & 26.28 & - \\ CSP & 32.14 & 92.86 & 0 & 43.76 & 0 & 32.56 & 34.28 & 0.3850 \\ GLRCSP & 44.64 & 92.86 & 33.68 & 35.72 & 78.58 & 57.1 & 24.09 & 0.0400 \\ CCSP1 & 33.92 & 92.86 & 26.54 & 43.76 & 69.84 & 53.38 & 24.58 & 0.0480 \\ CCSP2 & 30.36  
The left side of Figure 28 shows the average kappa from Table 16 for different methods implemented for the left and right hands. The right side of Figure 28 shows the average kappa from Table 17 for different methods implemented for the hand and foot. The bar chart shows that the highest bars are for our proposed method relative to other methods.