Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 291

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a hybrid brain–computer interface based on imagined movement and visual attention

Open access
Allison, B Z, Brunner, C, Kaiser, V, Müller-Putz, G R, Neuper, C, Pfurtscheller, G·2010·Journal of Neural Engineering

Abstract

Brain-computer interface (BCI) systems do not work for all users. This article introduces a novel combination of tasks that could inspire BCI systems that are more accurate than conventional BCIs, especially for users who cannot attain accuracy adequate for effective communication. Subjects performed tasks typically used in two BCI approaches, namely event-related desynchronization (ERD) and steady state visual evoked potential (SSVEP), both individually and in a 'hybrid' condition that combines both tasks. Electroencephalographic (EEG) data were recorded across three conditions. Subjects imagined moving the left or right hand (ERD), focused on one of the two oscillating visual stimuli (SSVEP), and then simultaneously performed both tasks. Accuracy and subjective measures were assessed. Offline analyses suggested that half of the subjects did not produce brain patterns that could be accurately discriminated in response to at least one of the two tasks. If these subjects produced comparable EEG patterns when trying to use a BCI, these subjects would not be able to communicate effectively because the BCI would make too many errors. Results also showed that switching to a different task used in BCIs could improve accuracy in some of these users. Switching to a hybrid approach eliminated this problem completely, and subjects generally did not consider the hybrid condition more difficult. Results validate this hybrid approach and suggest that subjects who cannot use a BCI should consider switching to a different BCI approach, especially a hybrid BCI. Subjects proficient with both approaches might combine them to increase information throughput by improving accuracy, reducing selection time, and/or increasing the number of possible commands.

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 · 10.1088/1741-2560/7/2/026007

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Show all 53 references

Cited by

See all 291

Metadata

Authors
Allison, B. Z., Brunner, C., Kaiser, V, Müller-Putz, G. R., Neuper, C., & Pfurtscheller, G.
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2010-03-23
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
026007
ISSN
  • 1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2560
OpenAlex
W1989513763
Cited by
291
References
53
FWCI
15.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Toward a hybrid brain–computer interface based on imagined movement and visual attention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1741-2560/7/2/026007
The paper
Allison, B. Z., Brunner, C., Kaiser, V, Müller-Putz, G. R., Neuper, C., & Pfurtscheller, G. (2010). Toward a hybrid brain–computer interface based on imagined movement and visual attention. Journal of Neural Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/7/2/026007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.