@article {2172, title = {The BCI competition III: Validating alternative approaches to actual BCI problems.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {153-9}, abstract = {

A\ brain-computer interface\ (BCI) is a system that allows its users to control external devices with\ brainactivity. Although the proof-of-concept was given decades ago, the reliable translation of user intent into device control commands is still a major challenge. Success requires the effective interaction of two adaptive controllers: the user{\textquoteright}s\ brain, which produces\ brain\ activity that encodes intent, and the BCI system, which translates that activity into device control commands. In order to facilitate this interaction, many laboratories are exploring a variety of signal analysis techniques to improve the adaptation of the BCI system to the user. In the literature, many machine learning and pattern classification algorithms have been reported to give impressive results when applied to BCI data in offline analyses. However, it is more difficult to evaluate their relative value for actual\ online\ use. BCI data competitions have been organized to provide objective formal evaluations of alternative methods. Prompted by the great interest in the first two BCI Competitions, we organized the third BCI Competition to address several of the most difficult and important analysis problems in BCI research. The paper describes the data sets that were provided to the competitors and gives an overview of the results.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Brain, Communication Aids for Disabled, Databases, Factual, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Neuromuscular Diseases, Software Validation, Technology Assessment, Biomedical, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875642}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792282}, author = {Benjamin Blankertz and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Krusienski, Dean J and Gerwin Schalk and Jonathan Wolpaw and Schl{\"o}gl, Alois and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Mill{\'a}n, Jos{\'e} del R and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2167, title = {The BCI Competition 2003: Progress and perspectives in detection and discrimination of EEG single trials.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Biomed Eng}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1044-51}, abstract = {Interest in developing a new method of man-to-machine communication--a brain-computer interface (BCI)--has grown steadily over the past few decades. BCIs create a new communication channel between the brain and an output device by bypassing conventional motor output pathways of nerves and muscles. These systems use signals recorded from the scalp, the surface of the cortex, or from inside the brain to enable users to control a variety of applications including simple word-processing software and orthotics. BCI technology could therefore provide a new communication and control option for individuals who cannot otherwise express their wishes to the outside world. Signal processing and classification methods are essential tools in the development of improved BCI technology. We organized the BCI Competition 2003 to evaluate the current state of the art of these tools. Four laboratories well versed in EEG-based BCI research provided six data sets in a documented format. We made these data sets (i.e., labeled training sets and unlabeled test sets) and their descriptions available on the Internet. The goal in the competition was to maximize the performance measure for the test labels. Researchers worldwide tested their algorithms and competed for the best classification results. This paper describes the six data sets and the results and function of the most successful algorithms.}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Artificial Intelligence, Brain, Cognition, Databases, Factual, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.826692}, author = {Benjamin Blankertz and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Curio, Gabriel and Theresa M Vaughan and Gerwin Schalk and Jonathan Wolpaw and Schl{\"o}gl, Alois and Neuper, Christa and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Hinterberger, T. and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2268, title = {Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control.}, journal = {Clin Neurophysiol}, volume = {113}, year = {2002}, month = {06/2002}, pages = {767-91}, abstract = {

For many years people have speculated that electroencephalographic activity or other electrophysiological measures of brain function might provide a new non-muscular channel for sending messages and commands to the external world - a brain-computer interface (BCI). Over the past 15 years, productive BCI research programs have arisen. Encouraged by new understanding of brain function, by the advent of powerful low-cost computer equipment, and by growing recognition of the needs and potentials of people with disabilities, these programs concentrate on developing new augmentative communication and\ controltechnology for those with severe neuromuscular disorders, such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, brainstem stroke, and spinal cord injury. The immediate goal is to provide these users, who may be completely paralyzed, or {\textquoteright}locked in{\textquoteright}, with basic communication capabilities so that they can express their wishes to caregivers or even operate word processing programs or neuroprostheses. Present-day BCIs determine the intent of the user from a variety of different electrophysiological signals. These signals include slow cortical potentials, P300 potentials, and mu or beta rhythms recorded from the scalp, and cortical neuronal activity recorded by implanted electrodes. They are translated in real-time into commands that operate a computer display or other device. Successful operation requires that the user encode commands in these signals and that the BCI derive the commands from the signals. Thus, the user and the BCI system need to adapt to each other both initially and continually so as to ensure stable performance. Current BCIs have maximum information transfer rates up to 10-25bits/min. This limited capacity can be valuable for people whose severe disabilities prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. At the same time, many possible applications of BCI technology, such as neuroprosthesis\ control, may require higher information transfer rates. Future progress will depend on: recognition that BCI research and development is an interdisciplinary problem, involving neurobiology, psychology, engineering, mathematics, and computer science; identification of those signals, whether evoked potentials, spontaneous rhythms, or neuronal firing rates, that users are best able to\ control\ independent of activity in conventional motor output pathways; development of training methods for helping users to gain and maintain that\ control; delineation of the best algorithms for translating these signals into device commands; attention to the identification and elimination of artifacts such as electromyographic and electro-oculographic activity; adoption of precise and objective procedures for evaluating BCI performance; recognition of the need for long-term as well as short-term assessment of BCI performance; identification of appropriate BCI applications and appropriate matching of applications and users; and attention to factors that affect user acceptance of augmentative technology, including ease of use, cosmesis, and provision of those communication and\ control\ capacities that are most important to the user. Development of BCI technology will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed research publications and avoidance of the hyperbolic and often misleading media attention that tends to generate unrealistic expectations in the public and skepticism in other researchers. With adequate recognition and effective engagement of all these issues, BCI systems could eventually provide an important new communication and\ control\ option for those with motor disabilities and might also give those without disabilities a supplementary\ control\ channel or a\ control\ channel useful in special circumstances.

}, keywords = {Brain Diseases, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computer Systems, Electroencephalography, Humans, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1388-2457}, doi = {10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00057-3}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12048038}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Dennis J. McFarland and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Theresa M Vaughan} }