@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 {3399, title = {Value of amplitude, phase, and coherence features for a sensorimotor rhythm-based brain-computer interface.}, journal = {Brain Res Bull}, volume = {87}, year = {2012}, month = {01/2012}, pages = {130-4}, abstract = {Measures that quantify the relationship between two or more brain signals are drawing attention as neuroscientists explore the mechanisms of large-scale integration that enable coherent behavior and cognition. Traditional Fourier-based measures of coherence have been used to quantify frequency-dependent relationships between two signals. More recently, several off-line studies examined phase-locking value (PLV) as a possible feature for use in brain-computer interface (BCI) systems. However, only a few individuals have been studied and full statistical comparisons among the different classes of features and their combinations have not been conducted. The present study examines the relative BCI performance of spectral power, coherence, and PLV, alone and in combination. The results indicate that spectral power produced classification at least as good as PLV, coherence, or any possible combination of these measures. This may be due to the fact that all three measures reflect mainly the activity of a single signal source (i.e., an area of sensorimotor cortex). This possibility is supported by the finding that EEG signals from different channels generally had near-zero phase differences. Coherence, PLV, and other measures of inter-channel relationships may be more valuable for BCIs that use signals from more than one distinct cortical source.}, keywords = {Algorithms, Brain, Electroencephalography, Humans, Motor Cortex, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1873-2747}, doi = {10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.09.019}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21985984}, author = {Krusienski, Dean J and Dennis J. McFarland and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2183, title = {Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs): Detection Instead of Classification.}, journal = {J Neurosci Methods}, volume = {167}, year = {2008}, month = {01/2008}, pages = {51-62}, abstract = {

Many studies over the past two decades have shown that people can use\ brain\ signals to convey their intent to a\ computer\ through\ brain-computer interfaces\ (BCIs). These devices operate by recording signals from the\ brain\ and translating these signals into device commands. They can be used by people who are severely paralyzed to communicate without any use of muscle activity. One of the major impediments in translating this novel technology into\ clinical\ applications is the current requirement for preliminary analyses to identify the\ brain\ signal features best suited for communication. This paper introduces and validates signal detection, which does not require such analysis procedures, as a new concept in BCI signal processing. This detection concept is realized with Gaussian mixture models (GMMs) that are used to model resting\ brain\ activity so that any change in\ relevantbrain\ signals can be detected. It is implemented in a package called SIGFRIED (SIGnal modeling For Real-time Identification and Event Detection). The results indicate that SIGFRIED produces results that are within the range of those achieved using a common analysis strategy that requires preliminary identification of signal features. They indicate that such laborious analysis procedures could be replaced by merely recording\ brain\ signals during rest. In summary, this paper demonstrates how SIGFRIED could be used to overcome one of the present impediments to translation of laboratory BCI demonstrations into clinically practical applications.

}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Brain, Brain Mapping, Electrocardiography, Electroencephalography, Humans, Male, Man-Machine Systems, Normal Distribution, Online Systems, Signal Detection, Psychological, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Software Validation, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0165-0270}, doi = {10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.08.010}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17920134}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Peter Brunner and Lester A Gerhardt and H Bischof and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2187, title = {Real-time detection of event-related brain activity.}, journal = {Neuroimage}, volume = {43}, year = {2008}, month = {11/2008}, pages = {245-9}, abstract = {

The complexity and inter-individual variation of\ brain\ signals impedes real-time detection of events in raw signals. To convert these complex signals into results that can be readily understood, current approaches usually apply statistical methods to data from known conditions after all data have been collected. The capability to provide meaningful visualization of complex\ brain\ signals without the requirement to initially collect data from all conditions would provide a new tool, essentially a new imaging technique, that would open up new avenues for the study of\ brain\ function. Here we show that a new analysis approach, called SIGFRIED, can overcome this serious limitation of current methods. SIGFRIED can visualize\ brain\ signal changes without requiring prior data collection from all conditions. This capacity is particularly well suited to applications in which comprehensive prior data collection is impossible or impractical, such as intraoperative localization of cortical function or detection of epileptic seizures.

}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Brain Mapping, Computer Systems, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Male, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity}, issn = {1095-9572}, doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.07.037}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18718544}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Leuthardt, E C and Peter Brunner and Ojemann, J G and Lester A Gerhardt and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2182, title = {Decoding two-dimensional movement trajectories using electrocorticographic signals in humans.}, journal = {J Neural Eng}, volume = {4}, year = {2007}, month = {09/2007}, pages = {264-75}, abstract = {

Signals from the brain could provide a non-muscular communication and control system, a brain-computer interface (BCI), for people who are severely paralyzed. A common BCI research strategy begins by decoding kinematic parameters from brain signals recorded during actual arm movement. It has been assumed that these parameters can be derived accurately only from signals recorded by intracortical microelectrodes, but the long-term stability of such electrodes is uncertain. The present study disproves this widespread assumption by showing in humans that kinematic parameters can also be decoded from signals recorded by subdural electrodes on the cortical surface (ECoG) with an accuracy comparable to that achieved in monkey studies using intracortical microelectrodes. A new ECoG feature labeled the local motor potential (LMP) provided the most information about movement. Furthermore, features displayed cosine tuning that has previously been described only for signals recorded within the brain. These results suggest that ECoG could be a more stable and less invasive alternative to intracortical electrodes for BCI systems, and could also prove useful in studies of motor function.

}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Arm, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Female, Humans, Male, Movement}, issn = {1741-2560}, doi = {10.1088/1741-2560/4/3/012}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17873429}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Kub{\'a}nek, J and Miller, John W and Nicholas R Anderson and Leuthardt, E C and Ojemann, J G and Limbrick, D and Moran, D and Lester A Gerhardt and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2174, title = {A {\textmu}-rhythm Matched Filter for Continuous Control of a Brain-Computer Interface.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Biomed Eng}, volume = {54}, year = {2007}, month = {02/2007}, pages = {273-80}, abstract = {

A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a system that provides an alternate nonmuscular communication/control channel for individuals with severe neuromuscular disabilities. With proper training, individuals can learn to modulate the amplitude of specific electroencephalographic (EEG) components (e.g., the 8-12 Hz mu rhythm and 18-26 Hz beta rhythm) over the sensorimotor cortex and use them to control a cursor on a computer screen. Conventional spectral techniques for monitoring the\ continuousamplitude fluctuations fail to capture essential amplitude/phase relationships of the mu and beta rhythms in a compact fashion and, therefore, are suboptimal. By extracting the characteristic mu rhythm for a user, the exact morphology can be characterized and exploited as a matched filter. A simple, parameterized model for the characteristic mu rhythm is proposed and its effectiveness as a matched filter is examined online for a one-dimensional cursor control task. The results suggest that amplitude/phase coupling exists between the mu and beta bands during event-related desynchronization, and that an appropriate matched filter can provide improved performance.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Cerebral Cortex, Cortical Synchronization, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Imagination, Pattern Recognition, Automated, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2006.886661}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17278584}, author = {Krusienski, Dean J and Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @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 {2166, title = {BCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Biomed Eng}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1034-43}, abstract = {Many laboratories have begun to develop brain-computer interface (BCI) systems that provide communication and control capabilities to people with severe motor disabilities. Further progress and realization of practical applications depends on systematic evaluations and comparisons of different brain signals, recording methods, processing algorithms, output formats, and operating protocols. However, the typical BCI system is designed specifically for one particular BCI method and is, therefore, not suited to the systematic studies that are essential for continued progress. In response to this problem, we have developed a documented general-purpose BCI research and development platform called BCI2000. BCI2000 can incorporate alone or in combination any brain signals, signal processing methods, output devices, and operating protocols. This report is intended to describe to investigators, biomedical engineers, and computer scientists the concepts that the BC12000 system is based upon and gives examples of successful BCI implementations using this system. To date, we have used BCI2000 to create BCI systems for a variety of brain signals, processing methods, and applications. The data show that these systems function well in online operation and that BCI2000 satisfies the stringent real-time requirements of BCI systems. By substantially reducing labor and cost, BCI2000 facilitates the implementation of different BCI systems and other psychophysiological experiments. It is available with full documentation and free of charge for research or educational purposes and is currently being used in a variety of studies by many research groups.}, keywords = {Algorithms, Brain, Cognition, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computer Peripherals, Electroencephalography, Equipment Design, Equipment Failure Analysis, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Systems Integration, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.827072}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Hinterberger, T. and Niels Birbaumer and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @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} } @article {2163, title = {Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng}, volume = {8}, year = {2000}, month = {06/2000}, pages = {164-73}, abstract = {

Over the past decade, many laboratories have begun to explore brain-computer interface (BCI) technology as a radically new communication option for those with neuromuscular impairments that prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. BCI{\textquoteright}s provide these users with communication channels that do not depend on peripheral nerves and muscles. This article summarizes the first international meeting devoted to BCI research and development. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s use electroencephalographic (EEG) activity recorded at the scalp or single-unit activity recorded from within cortex to control cursor movement, select letters or icons, or operate a neuroprosthesis. The central element in each BCI is a translation algorithm that converts electrophysiological input from the user into output that controls external devices. BCI operation depends on effective interaction between two adaptive controllers, the user who encodes his or her commands in the electrophysiological input provided to the BCI, and the BCI which recognizes the commands contained in the input and expresses them in device control. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s have maximum information transfer rates of 5-25 b/min. Achievement of greater speed and accuracy depends on improvements in signal processing, translation algorithms, and user training. These improvements depend on increased interdisciplinary cooperation between neuroscientists, engineers, computer programmers, psychologists, and rehabilitation specialists, and on adoption and widespread application of objective methods for evaluating alternative methods. The practical use of BCI technology depends on the development of appropriate applications, identification of appropriate user groups, and careful attention to the needs and desires of individual users. BCI research and development will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed publications, and from adoption of standard venues for presentations and discussion.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Cerebral Cortex, Communication Aids for Disabled, Disabled Persons, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Neuromuscular Diseases, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1063-6528}, doi = {10.1109/TRE.2000.847807}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10896178}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Heetderks, W J and Dennis J. McFarland and Peckham, P H and Gerwin Schalk and Emanuel Donchin and Quatrano, L A and Robinson, C J and Theresa M Vaughan} }