Cited by 1EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Emotion and Mood Recognition

Informing EEG-Based Error Decoding With Explainable AI

Jeremy Chan, Ho Tung, Wimmer, Michael, Šimić, Ilija, Müller-Putz, Gernot R., Veas, Eduardo·2025·2025 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC)

Abstract

Human cognition involves intricate neural processes for error perception and correction. These processes are crucial in error-monitoring processes such as feedback, learning, control, and decision-making. We present a complete workflow using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to guide the feature extraction of electroencephalographic (EEG) signals in a classification task with error-related brain responses. The identification of relevant channels for classification problems has practical relevance, as a dense electrode setup reduces the usability of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Specialists can inspect and select seemingly important sensors based on knowledge of brain regions and neural patterns. However, reduced configurations often harm accurate model performance. The contribution of this work lies in demonstrating that XAI can be used to inform the extraction of relevant temporal and spatial information with a strong connection to machine learning model sensitivity. We employed a local and a global XAI method to i) evaluate consistency with expert knowledge, ii) identify relevant time points for asynchronous error decoding, and iii) systematically reduce the error decoding EEG setup. This advances the integration of XAI in neuroscience, thus contributing to the design of practical BCIs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/smc58881.2025.11343575

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Post-hoc importance estimation has been used to guide channel and time-window selection for ErrP decoding, with the estimates validated against error-processing neurophysiology.

    “Post-hoc importance estimation has also been used to guide channel and time-window selection for ErrP decoding, with the estimates validated against error-processing neurophysiology [24].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jeremy Chan, H. T., Wimmer, M., Šimić, I., Müller-Putz, G. R., & Veas, E.
Affiliations
  • Graz University of Technology,Institute of Human-Centred Computing,Graz,Austria
  • Graz University of Technology (AT)
  • Know Center Research GmbH (Austria) (AT)
Venue
2025 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2025-10-05
Pages
4550-4557
ISSN
1062-922X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7125896244
Cited by
0
References
3
FWCI
0.00
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Conference proceedings/Conference proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
error decoding, explainable AI, EEG feature extraction, brain-computer interface

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