The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cortically coupled computer vision for rapid image search
Abstract
We describe a real-time electroencephalography (EEG)-based brain-computer interface system for triaging imagery presented using rapid serial visual presentation. A target image in a sequence of nontarget distractor images elicits in the EEG a stereotypical spatiotemporal response, which can be detected. A pattern classifier uses this response to reprioritize the image sequence, placing detected targets in the front of an image stack. We use single-trial analysis based on linear discrimination to recover spatial components that reflect differences in EEG activity evoked by target versus nontarget images. We find an optimal set of spatial weights for 59 EEG sensors within a sliding 50-ms time window. Using this simple classifier allows us to process EEG in real time. The detection accuracy across five subjects is on average 92%, i.e., in a sequence of 2500 images, resorting images based on detector output results in 92% of target images being moved from a random position in the sequence to one of the first 250 images (first 10% of the sequence). The approach leverages the highly robust and invariant object recognition capabilities of the human visual system, using single-trial EEG analysis to efficiently detect neural signatures correlated with the recognition event.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Learning to control a brain–machine interface for reaching and grasping by primates
Carmena, J. M., Lebedev, M. A., Crist, R. E., O'Doherty, J. E., Santucci, D. M., Dimitrov, D. F., Patil, P. G., Henriquez, C. S., & Nicolelis, M. A. L. (2003) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000042 · Cited by 1,761
Perception of Objects in Natural Scenes: Is It Really Attention Free?
Evans, K. K., & Treisman, A. (2005) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1476 · Cited by 281
Cited by
Neurophysiological predictor of SMR-based BCI performance
Blankertz, B., Sannelli, C., Halder, S., Hammer, E. M., Kübler, A., Müller, K.-R., Curio, G., & Dickhaus, T. (2010) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.022 · Cited by 674
Visual and Auditory Brain–Computer Interfaces
Gao, S., Wang, Y., Gao, X., & Hong, B. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2014.2300164 · Cited by 449
The Berlin brain-computer Interface: accurate performance from first-session in BCI-naive subjects
Blankertz, B., Losch, F., Krauledat, M., Dornhege, G., Curio, G., & Muller, K.-R. (2008) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2008.923152 · Cited by 338
Errare machinale est: the use of error-related potentials in brain-machine interfaces
Chavarriaga, R., Sobolewski, A., & Millán, J. D. R. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00208 · Cited by 311
Zakeri, H., Nejad, F. M., & Fahimifar, A. (2017) · Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11831-016-9194-z · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerson, A. D., Parra, L. C., & Sajda, P.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
- Published
- 2006-06
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 174-179
- ISSN
- 1534-4320 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0210
- OpenAlex
- W2163027455
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Cortically coupled computer vision for rapid image search. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tnsre.2006.875550
- The paper
- Gerson, A. D., Parra, L. C., & Sajda, P. (2006). Cortically coupled computer vision for rapid image search. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tnsre.2006.875550
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.