Changes

Where, <math>CC_{i,e}</math> is the ''i''th estimated value, <math>CC_{i,t}</math> is the ''<math>i^{th}</math>'' true value, and ''<math>\bar{CC}_{e}</math>'' is the mean of the estimated values.<br />

Where, <math>CC_{i,e}</math> is the ''i''th estimated value, <math>CC_{i,t}</math> is the ''<math>i^{th}</math>'' true value, and ''<math>\bar{CC}_{e}</math>'' is the mean of the estimated values.<br />

==Results==

==Results==

The table 1 show the list of row EMG value which were subsequently normalized and weighed in order to train – as input – the ANN. In Table 2 we report the descriptive and comparative statistical results. With regard to the descriptive statistical aspect we can consider the mean and SD values for onset latency (1.96 msec ± 0.18 msec vs. 2.01 msec ± 0.21 msec), amplitude (5.76 mV ± 2.01 mV vs''.'' 5.89 mV ± 2.51 mV) and integral area (11.09 mV/msec ± 4.45 mV/msec vs''.'' 11.27 mV/msec ± 4.34 mV/msec) for right and left masseter, respectively.[[File:Symmetry 2.jpg|miniatura|'''Table 2:''' In the table are reported statistically descriptive data and ''p''-values between sides for onset latency, amplitude and integral area of the bR-MEPs.

The table 1 show the list of row EMG value which were subsequently normalized and weighed in order to train – as input – the ANN. In Table 2 we report the descriptive and comparative statistical results. With regard to the descriptive statistical aspect we can consider the mean and SD values for onset latency (1.96 msec ± 0.18 msec vs. 2.01 msec ± 0.21 msec), amplitude (5.76 mV ± 2.01 mV vs''.'' 5.89 mV ± 2.51 mV) and integral area (11.09 mV/msec ± 4.45 mV/msec vs''.'' 11.27 mV/msec ± 4.34 mV/msec) for right and left masseter, respectively.[[File:Symmetry 2.jpg|thumb|'''Table 2:''' In the table are reported statistically descriptive data and ''p''-values between sides for onset latency, amplitude and integral area of the bR-MEPs.

Standardized asymmetry (*) and Standardized Kurtosis (**) outside -2 to +2 range indicate significant deviations from normality and could compromise the validity of many

Standardized asymmetry (*) and Standardized Kurtosis (**) outside -2 to +2 range indicate significant deviations from normality and could compromise the validity of many

The MSE and the <math>R^2</math> were computed to test the ANN. If the ANN estimated the correlation coefficients with zero error, MSE must be 0 and the <math>R^2</math> must be 1. In comparison of the correlation coefficients which computed from the EMG signals of the right and the left muscles and the outcomes of the ANN (Table 3) which were trained with the normalized features computed from the EMG of the left muscles, it can be seen that the outcomes of the ANN are closest to the correlation coefficients (Table 4), and that ANN is able to compute correlation coefficients, based on features of only the left muscles, with almost zero errors.

The MSE and the <math>R^2</math> were computed to test the ANN. If the ANN estimated the correlation coefficients with zero error, MSE must be 0 and the <math>R^2</math> must be 1. In comparison of the correlation coefficients which computed from the EMG signals of the right and the left muscles and the outcomes of the ANN (Table 3) which were trained with the normalized features computed from the EMG of the left muscles, it can be seen that the outcomes of the ANN are closest to the correlation coefficients (Table 4), and that ANN is able to compute correlation coefficients, based on features of only the left muscles, with almost zero errors.

[[File:Senza nomeSymmetry 3a.jpg|sinistra|miniatura|'''Table 3:''' This table shows the correlation coefficients, which can be computed with Equations 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, and the correlation coefficients computed by ANN.]]

[[File:Senza nomeSymmetry 3a.jpg|left|thumb|'''Table 3:''' This table shows the correlation coefficients, which can be computed with Equations 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, and the correlation coefficients computed by ANN.]]

Figure 2 shows the neuromuscular responses of patient #20 (Table 1) with the measurements of latency (+), peak-to-peak amplitude (*), and integral area (x). The high symmetry of the _bR-MEPs can be observed.<br />

Figure 2 shows the neuromuscular responses of patient #20 (Table 1) with the measurements of latency (+), peak-to-peak amplitude (*), and integral area (x). The high symmetry of the _bR-MEPs can be observed.<br />

[[File:Symmetry 3.jpg|sinistra|miniatura|'''Table 4:''' This table shows the MSE and R2 values, which were computed to test the output of the ANN. MSE values, are very close to zero, and R2 values are very close to 1: our ANN is well able build up a good model starting from our inputs.]]

[[File:Symmetry 3.jpg|left|thumb|'''Table 4:''' This table shows the MSE and R2 values, which were computed to test the output of the ANN. MSE values, are very close to zero, and R2 values are very close to 1: our ANN is well able build up a good model starting from our inputs.]]

The close correspondence between the values calculated by ANN for right masseter starting from the left masseter is irrefutable index of organic symmetry of the trigeminal motor system.

The close correspondence between the values calculated by ANN for right masseter starting from the left masseter is irrefutable index of organic symmetry of the trigeminal motor system.

This normalization model implies to a series of requirements such as the stability of the neuromuscular responses, the assessment of

This normalization model implies to a series of requirements such as the stability of the neuromuscular responses, the assessment of

“ <math>_mANEE</math> ” and the symmetry between sides of this last parameter.  

“ <math>_mANEE</math> ” and the symmetry between sides of this last parameter.

==Discussion==

==Discussion==