CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyMuscle activation and electromyography studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A multi-signature brain–computer interface: use of transient and steady-state responses

Open access
Severens, Marianne, Farquhar, Jason, Duysens, Jacques, Desain, Peter·2013·Journal of Neural Engineering
DOI 10.1088/1741-2560/10/2/026005
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to increase the information transfer in brain-computer interfaces (BCI). Therefore, a multi-signature BCI was developed and investigated. Stimuli were designed to simultaneously evoke transient somatosensory event-related potentials (ERPs) and steady-state somatosensory potentials (SSSEPs) and the ERPs and SSSEPs in isolation. APPROACH: Twelve subjects participated in two sessions. In the first session, the single and combined stimulation conditions were compared on these somatosensory responses and on the classification performance. In the second session the on-line performance with the combined stimulation was evaluated while subjects received feedback. Furthermore, in both sessions, the performance based on ERP and SSSEP features was compared. MAIN RESULTS: No difference was found in the ERPs and SSSEPs between stimulation conditions. The combination of ERP and SSSEP features did not perform better than with ERP features only. In both sessions, the classification performances based on ERP and combined features were higher than the classification based on SSSEP features. SIGNIFICANCE: Although the multi-signature BCI did not increase performance, it also did not negatively impact it. Therefore, such stimuli could be used and the best performing feature set could then be chosen individually.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1741-2560/10/2/026005

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Belitski A, 2011, J. Neural Eng., 8, 10.1088/1741-2560/8/2/025022 · DOI
  2. 10.1007/s10548-010-0143-0 · DOI
  3. Bishop C M, 2006, Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning
  4. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.01.051 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s11517-012-0877-9 · DOI
  6. Brouwer A M, 2010, Front. Neurosci., 4, 19
  7. Brunner P, 2010, J. Neural Eng., 7, 10.1088/1741-2560/7/5/056013 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/0168-5597(93)90036-O · DOI
  9. Capilla A, 2011, Plos One, 6, 10.1371/journal.pone.0014543 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/s00221-003-1437-1 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/0013-4694(88)90149-6 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.07.084 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.01.004 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.022 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/S1388-2457(03)00129-9 · DOI
  16. 10.1007/s002210100682 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Hill N J, 2012, J. Neural Eng., 9
  18. 10.1016/j.clinph.2004.12.005 · DOI
  19. 10.1515/bmte.2001.46.7-8.186 · DOI
  20. Müller-Putz G, 2008, Int. J. Bioelectromag., 10, 52
  21. 10.1109/TNSRE.2005.863842 · DOI
  22. 10.1109/MIS.2008.41 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.003 · DOI
  24. 10.1007/s00221-010-2396-y · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.05.016 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/0168-0102(95)00994-9 · DOI
  27. Thurlings M E, 2012, J. Neural Eng., 9, 10.1088/1741-2560/9/4/045005 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/S1388-2457(99)00146-7 · DOI
  29. 10.1186/1744-9081-6-28 · DOI
  30. van der Waal M, 2012, J. Neural Eng., 9, 10.1088/1741-2560/9/4/045002 · DOI
  31. van Gerven M, 2009, J. Neural Eng., 6
  32. Vlek R J, 2011, J. Neural Eng., 8
  33. Winter D A, 2005, Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 36

Metadata

Authors
Severens, M., Farquhar, J., Duysens, J., & Desain, P.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Sint Maartenskliniek (NL)
Corresponding author
Severens, Marianne
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Publisher
IOP Publishing
Published
2013-02-01
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
026005
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
DOI
10.1088/1741-2560/10/2/026005
OpenAlex
W2137181890
Cited by
36
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministerie van Economische Zaken
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
brain-computer interface, somatosensory event-related potentials, steady-state somatosensory evoked potentials, transient and steady-state response, information transmission, stimulus design, feature selection, classification performance
MeSH terms
Brain, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Electrodes, Electroencephalography, Electromyography, Evoked Potentials, Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory, Female, Humans, Male, Online Systems, Physical Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Young Adult, Brain-Computer Interfaces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A multi-signature brain–computer interface: use of transient and steady-state responses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1741-2560/10/2/026005
The paper
Severens, M., Farquhar, J., Duysens, J., & Desain, P. (2013). A multi-signature brain–computer interface: use of transient and steady-state responses. Journal of Neural Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/10/2/026005