03540nas a2200457 4500008004100000022001400041245004900055210004100104260001200145300001100157490000700168520234400175653001002519653001502529653001402544653001002558653002702568653002702595653002102622653001302643653001102656653000902667653000902676653001902685653001102704653003102715653002702746653000902773653001302782653003302795653004102828653002802869100002302897700001902920700002102939700002002960700001802980700002102998700001503019856004803034 2007 eng d a1053-811900aAn MEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI).0 aMEGbased braincomputer interface BCI c07/2007 a581-930 v363 a

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) allow for communicating intentions by mere brain activity, not involving muscles. Thus, BCIs may offer patients who have lost all voluntary muscle control the only possible way to communicate. Many recent studies have demonstrated that BCIs based on electroencephalography(EEG) can allow healthy and severely paralyzed individuals to communicate. While this approach is safe and inexpensive, communication is slow. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) provides signals with higher spatiotemporal resolution than EEG and could thus be used to explore whether these improved signal properties translate into increased BCI communication speed. In this study, we investigated the utility of an MEG-based BCI that uses voluntary amplitude modulation of sensorimotor mu and beta rhythms. To increase the signal-to-noise ratio, we present a simple spatial filtering method that takes the geometric properties of signal propagation in MEG into account, and we present methods that can process artifacts specifically encountered in an MEG-based BCI. Exemplarily, six participants were successfully trained to communicate binary decisions by imagery of limb movements using a feedback paradigm. Participants achieved significant mu rhythm self control within 32 min of feedback training. For a subgroup of three participants, we localized the origin of the amplitude modulated signal to the motor cortex. Our results suggest that an MEG-based BCI is feasible and efficient in terms of user training.

10aAdult10aAlgorithms10aArtifacts10aBrain10aElectroencephalography10aElectromagnetic Fields10aElectromyography10aFeedback10aFemale10aFoot10aHand10aHead Movements10aHumans10aMagnetic Resonance Imaging10aMagnetoencephalography10aMale10aMovement10aPrincipal Component Analysis10aSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted10aUser-Computer Interface1 aMellinger, Jürgen1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aBraun, Christoph1 aPreissl, Hubert1 aRosenstiel, W1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aKübler, A uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1747551102785nas a2200445 4500008004100000022001400041245015300055210006900208260001200277300001000289490000700299520147600306653001501782653002801797653002101825653002701846653002701873653002201900653001101922653001101933653001601944653000901960653001601969653001401985653003501999653002802034100002502062700001302087700002302100700002002123700002102143700001502164700001902179700001802198700002102216700001802237700001502255700002102270856004802291 2006 eng d a1534-432000aClassifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fast BCI implementation: comparison of nonparalyzed and completely paralyzed subjects.0 aClassifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fa c06/2006 a183-60 v143 a

We summarize results from a series of related studies that aim to develop a motor-imagery-based brain-computer interface using a single recording session of electroencephalogram (EEG) or electrocorticogram (ECoG) signals for each subject. We apply the same experimental and analytical methods to 11 nonparalysed subjects (eight EEG, three ECoG), and to five paralyzed subjects (four EEG, one ECoG) who had been unable to communicate for some time. While it was relatively easy to obtain classifiable signals quickly from most of the nonparalyzed subjects, it proved impossible to classify the signals obtained from the paralyzed patients by the same methods. This highlights the fact that though certain BCI paradigms may work well with healthy subjects, this does not necessarily indicate success with the target user group. We outline possible reasons for this failure to transfer.

10aAlgorithms10aArtificial Intelligence10aCluster Analysis10aComputer User Training10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials10aFemale10aHumans10aImagination10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aParalysis10aPattern Recognition, Automated10aUser-Computer Interface1 aHill, Jeremy, Jeremy1 aLal, T N1 aSchröder, Michael1 aHinterberger, T1 aWilhelm, Barbara1 aNijboer, F1 aMochty, Ursula1 aWidman, Guido1 aElger, Christian1 aSchölkopf, B1 aKübler, A1 aBirbaumer, Niels uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1679228902332nas a2200457 4500008004100000022001400041245009000055210006900145260001200214300001100226490000700237520103300244653000901277653003401286653002701320653002901347653003701376653001101413653001101424653001601435653000901451653001601460653001701476653001301493653001401506653002301520653002801543653002501571653002201596653002801618100001501646700001501661700002301676700002401699700001601723700001901739700002601758700002101784700002101805856004801826 2005 eng d a1526-632X00aPatients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brain-computer interface.0 aPatients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brai c05/2005 a1775-70 v643 a

People with severe motor disabilities can maintain an acceptable quality of life if they can communicate. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), which do not depend on muscle control, can provide communication. Four people severely disabled by ALS learned to operate a BCI with EEG rhythms recorded over sensorimotor cortex. These results suggest that a sensorimotor rhythm-based BCI could help maintain quality of life for people with ALS.

10aAged10aAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials, Motor10aEvoked Potentials, Somatosensory10aFemale10aHumans10aImagination10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMotor Cortex10aMovement10aParalysis10aPhotic Stimulation10aProstheses and Implants10aSomatosensory Cortex10aTreatment Outcome10aUser-Computer Interface1 aKübler, A1 aNijboer, F1 aMellinger, Jürgen1 aVaughan, Theresa, M1 aPawelzik, H1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aMcFarland, Dennis, J.1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aWolpaw, Jonathan uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15911809