The Nyquist frequency value is not enough for using mne_icalabel.label_components()

[MargaretK]

Hello MNE users!

I was working on eegbci dataset and was adviced to run mne_icalabel.label_components() before exluding any ICA components.

Before using mne_icalabel.label_components() the data should be filtered between 1 and 100 Hz. However, the data I’m using was recorded with sampling frequency of 160 Hz and, therefore, the upper pass-band edge for my data is 80 Hz, which is not enough if I want to use mne_icalabel.label_components().

Is there anything to do about it or it just means that I cannot use this method? If it’s impossible to use mne_icalabel.label_components(), are there any alternatives to this method?

Thank you.

Here is my code:

from mne.datasets import eegbci
eegbci.load_data(3, 1, path);
raw = mne.io.read_raw_edf(path, preload = True)

# preprocessing
raw_f = raw.copy().filter(l_freq=1.0, h_freq=100)

At this point the error occurs:

ValueError: h_freq ([100.]) must be less than the Nyquist frequency 80.0
raw_avg_ref = raw_f.copy().set_eeg_reference(ref_channels='average');

If I set the h_freq = 79, then another error occurs:

ica = mne.preprocessing.ICA(
    n_components=15,
    max_iter='auto',
    method="infomax",
    random_state=97,
    fit_params=dict(extended=True)
)
ica.fit(raw_avg_ref);

ic_labels = label_components(raw_avg_ref, ica, method="iclabel")

RuntimeWarning: The provided Raw instance is not filtered between 1 and 100 Hz. 
ICLabel was designed to classify features extracted from an EEG dataset bandpass
filtered between 1 and 100 Hz (see the 'filter()' method for Raw and Epochs instances).

I will be grateful for any help

• MNE version: 1.6.1
• operating system: Windows 11

[richard (Richard Höchenberger)]

You can simply use different filter settings like you did in your 2nd example. You’re only getting a warning and not a fatal error there. ICA component classification performance may or may not be compromised by that. I have used MNE-ICALabel with data low-pass filtered with an upper bound of 30 Hz and still got satisfactory results. It really depends on your data and the types of artifacts you want to capture.

Best wishes,
Richard

[MargaretK]

Thank you!