Cited by 103EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesNeural dynamics and brain functionMuscle activation and electromyography studies

Design and analysis of closed-loop decoder adaptation algorithms for brain-machine interfaces

Dangi, Siddharth, Orsborn, Amy L., Moorman, Helene G., Carmena, Jose M.·2013·Neural Computation

Abstract

Closed-loop decoder adaptation (CLDA) is an emerging paradigm for achieving rapid performance improvements in online brain-machine interface (BMI) operation. Designing an effective CLDA algorithm requires making multiple important decisions, including choosing the timescale of adaptation, selecting which decoder parameters to adapt, crafting the corresponding update rules, and designing CLDA parameters. These design choices, combined with the specific settings of CLDA parameters, will directly affect the algorithm's ability to make decoder parameters converge to values that optimize performance. In this article, we present a general framework for the design and analysis of CLDA algorithms and support our results with experimental data of two monkeys performing a BMI task. First, we analyze and compare existing CLDA algorithms to highlight the importance of four critical design elements: the adaptation timescale, selective parameter adaptation, smooth decoder updates, and intuitive CLDA parameters. Second, we introduce mathematical convergence analysis using measures such as mean-squared error and KL divergence as a useful paradigm for evaluating the convergence properties of a prototype CLDA algorithm before experimental testing. By applying these measures to an existing CLDA algorithm, we demonstrate that our convergence analysis is an effective analytical tool that can ultimately inform and improve the design of CLDA algorithms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/neco_a_00460

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The plasticity/stability dilemma with respect to MI BCI co-adaptation has not been adequately studied so far.

    “Since the plasticity/stability dilemma with respect to MI BCI co-adaptation has not been adequately studied so far [21,52], we believe that a parsimonious approach eventually trading off decoding accuracy in the short term in order to better fulfill the subject learning objective in the long term, as done here, is preferable.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dangi, S., Orsborn, A. L., Moorman, H. G., & Carmena, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Neural Computation
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2013-07
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
1693-1731
ISSN
  • 0899-7667 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-888X
OpenAlex
W2139845258
Cited by
103
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 7
FWCI
6.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neural Computation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
brain-computer interface, online decoding, convergence analysis, mean squared error, Kullback-Leibler divergence, primate motor control
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Adaptation, Physiological, Algorithms, Animals, Arm, Macaca mulatta, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Motor Neurons, Movement, Neural Pathways, Time Factors, Visual Cortex, Likelihood Functions, Feedback, Physiological, 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