@article {3370, title = {Brain-computer interface (BCI) evaluation in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.}, journal = {Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener}, volume = {15}, year = {2014}, month = {06/2014}, pages = {207-15}, abstract = {Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) might restore communication to people severely disabled by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or other disorders. We sought to: 1) define a protocol for determining whether a person with ALS can use a visual P300-based BCI; 2) determine what proportion of this population can use the BCI; and 3) identify factors affecting BCI performance. Twenty-five individuals with ALS completed an evaluation protocol using a standard 6 {\texttimes} 6 matrix and parameters selected by stepwise linear discrimination. With an 8-channel EEG montage, the subjects fell into two groups in BCI accuracy (chance accuracy 3\%). Seventeen averaged 92 ({\textpm} 3)\% (range 71-100\%), which is adequate for communication (G70 group). Eight averaged 12 ({\textpm} 6)\% (range 0-36\%), inadequate for communication (L40 subject group). Performance did not correlate with disability: 11/17 (65\%) of G70 subjects were severely disabled (i.e. ALSFRS-R < 5). All L40 subjects had visual impairments (e.g. nystagmus, diplopia, ptosis). P300 was larger and more anterior in G70 subjects. A 16-channel montage did not significantly improve accuracy. In conclusion, most people severely disabled by ALS could use a visual P300-based BCI for communication. In those who could not, visual impairment was the principal obstacle. For these individuals, auditory P300-based BCIs might be effective.}, keywords = {Adult, Aged, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Biofeedback, Psychology, brain-computer interfaces, Communication Disorders, Electroencephalography, Event-Related Potentials, P300, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Online Systems, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time}, issn = {2167-9223}, doi = {10.3109/21678421.2013.865750}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24555843}, author = {McCane, Lynn M and Sellers, Eric W and Dennis J. McFarland and Mak, Joseph N and Carmack, C Steve and Zeitlin, Debra and Jonathan Wolpaw and Theresa M Vaughan} } @article {3386, title = {A practical, intuitive brain-computer interface for communicating {\textquoteright}yes{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteright}no{\textquoteright} by listening.}, journal = {J Neural Eng}, volume = {11}, year = {2014}, month = {06/2014}, pages = {035003}, abstract = {OBJECTIVE: Previous work has shown that it is possible to build an EEG-based binary brain-computer interface system (BCI) driven purely by shifts of attention to auditory stimuli. However, previous studies used abrupt, abstract stimuli that are often perceived as harsh and unpleasant, and whose lack of inherent meaning may make the interface unintuitive and difficult for beginners. We aimed to establish whether we could transition to a system based on more natural, intuitive stimuli (spoken words {\textquoteright}yes{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteright}no{\textquoteright}) without loss of performance, and whether the system could be used by people in the locked-in state. APPROACH: We performed a counterbalanced, interleaved within-subject comparison between an auditory streaming BCI that used beep stimuli, and one that used word stimuli. Fourteen healthy volunteers performed two sessions each, on separate days. We also collected preliminary data from two subjects with advanced amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), who used the word-based system to answer a set of simple yes-no questions. MAIN RESULTS: The N1, N2 and P3 event-related potentials elicited by words varied more between subjects than those elicited by beeps. However, the difference between responses to attended and unattended stimuli was more consistent with words than beeps. Healthy subjects{\textquoteright} performance with word stimuli (mean 77\% {\textpm} 3.3 s.e.) was slightly but not significantly better than their performance with beep stimuli (mean 73\% {\textpm} 2.8 s.e.). The two subjects with ALS used the word-based BCI to answer questions with a level of accuracy similar to that of the healthy subjects. SIGNIFICANCE: Since performance using word stimuli was at least as good as performance using beeps, we recommend that auditory streaming BCI systems be built with word stimuli to make the system more pleasant and intuitive. Our preliminary data show that word-based streaming BCI is a promising tool for communication by people who are locked in.}, keywords = {Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Auditory Perception, brain-computer interfaces, Communication Aids for Disabled, Electroencephalography, Equipment Design, Equipment Failure Analysis, Female, Humans, Male, Man-Machine Systems, Middle Aged, Quadriplegia, Treatment Outcome, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1741-2552}, doi = {10.1088/1741-2560/11/3/035003}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24838278}, author = {Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Ricci, Erin and Haider, Sameah and McCane, Lynn M and Susan M Heckman and Jonathan Wolpaw and Theresa M Vaughan} } @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 {2165, title = {The Wadsworth Center brain-computer interface (BCI) research and development program.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {11}, year = {2003}, month = {06/2003}, pages = {204-7}, abstract = {

Brain-computer interface (BCI) research at the Wadsworth Center has focused primarily on using electroencephalogram (EEG) rhythms recorded from the scalp over sensorimotor cortex to\ control\ cursor movement in one or two dimensions. Recent and current studies seek to improve the speed and accuracy of this\ control\ by improving the selection of signal features and their translation into device commands, by incorporating additional signal features, and by optimizing the adaptive interaction between the user and system. In addition, to facilitate the evaluation, comparison, and combination of alternative BCI methods, we have developed a general-purpose BCI system called BCI-2000 and have made it available to other research\ groups. Finally, in collaboration with several other\ groups, we are developing simple BCI applications and are testing their practicality and long-term value for people with severe motor disabilities.

}, keywords = {Academic Medical Centers, Adult, Algorithms, Artifacts, Brain, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Feedback, Humans, Middle Aged, Nervous System Diseases, Research, Research Design, User-Computer Interface, Visual Perception}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2003.814442}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12899275}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Dennis J. McFarland and Theresa M Vaughan and Gerwin Schalk} }