Informing EEG-Based Error Decoding With Explainable AI
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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].”
From ERP-XTTN: interpretable prototype-guided cross-attention for cross-subject ERP classification (2026) · cites this paper as [24]
Cites
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474 · see citing works
EEGNet: a compact convolutional neural network for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces
Lawhern, V. J., Solon, A. J., Waytowich, N. R., Gordon, S. M., Hung, C. P., & Lance, B. J. (2018) · Journal of Neural Engineering · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/aace8c · Cited by 5,115 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Similarly, EEGNet, a compact and interpretable convolutional NN (CNN) for BCI applications, was successfully implemented in paradigms with both discrete [39] and continuous [40] errors.”
Theta EEG dynamics of the error-related negativity
Trujillo, L. T., & Allen, J. J. B. (2007) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2006.11.009 · Cited by 314 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Data preprocessing included temporal filtering be-tween 1 and 10 Hz, a frequency range of particular interest in error processing (e.g., Trujillo et al. [47]), which also attenuates excessive contamination from muscle artifacts.”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
ERP-XTTN: interpretable prototype-guided cross-attention for cross-subject ERP classification
Genevier Wyman, C., & Hirshfield, L. (2026) · Journal of Neural Engineering · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ae9f95
“These methods can identify features associated with a trained model’s predictions and map them to known neurophysiological phenomena, in some cases at the single-trial level, but because they are approximations computed after training, their faithfulness to the decision process is not guaranteed;…”
- 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