Cited by 55EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

A co-adaptive brain-computer interface for end users with severe motor impairment

Open access
Faller, Josef, Scherer, Reinhold, Costa, Ursula, Opisso, Eloy, Medina, Josep, Müller-Putz, Gernot R.·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Co-adaptive training paradigms for event-related desynchronization (ERD) based brain-computer interfaces (BCI) have proven effective for healthy users. As of yet, it is not clear whether co-adaptive training paradigms can also benefit users with severe motor impairment. The primary goal of our paper was to evaluate a novel cue-guided, co-adaptive BCI training paradigm with severely impaired volunteers. The co-adaptive BCI supports a non-control state, which is an important step toward intuitive, self-paced control. A secondary aim was to have the same participants operate a specifically designed self-paced BCI training paradigm based on the auto-calibrated classifier. The co-adaptive BCI analyzed the electroencephalogram from three bipolar derivations (C3, Cz, and C4) online, while the 22 end users alternately performed right hand movement imagery (MI), left hand MI and relax with eyes open (non-control state). After less than five minutes, the BCI auto-calibrated and proceeded to provide visual feedback for the MI task that could be classified better against the non-control state. The BCI continued to regularly recalibrate. In every calibration step, the system performed trial-based outlier rejection and trained a linear discriminant analysis classifier based on one auto-selected logarithmic band-power feature. In 24 minutes of training, the co-adaptive BCI worked significantly (p = 0.01) better than chance for 18 of 22 end users. The self-paced BCI training paradigm worked significantly (p = 0.01) better than chance in 11 of 20 end users. The presented co-adaptive BCI complements existing approaches in that it supports a non-control state, requires very little setup time, requires no BCI expert and works online based on only two electrodes. The preliminary results from the self-paced BCI paradigm compare favorably to previous studies and the collected data will allow to further improve self-paced BCI systems for disabled users.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0101168

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Direct evidence of learned SMR modulation at the BCI feature level is rare or incomplete, derived in able-bodied populations and not longitudinal.

    “Direct evidence of learned SMR modulation at the BCI feature level is, in fact, rare or incomplete, derived in able-bodied populations and not longitudinal [10,23,26,28,38–41].”
  • Other studies have reported emergence of SMR modulations, but given the short number of experimental sessions, the observed neurophysiological patterns might only be indicative of transitory effects rather than consolidated subject learning.

    “Other studies have reported emergence of such SMR modulations [26,28,38,39], but given the short number of experimental sessions they carried out, the observed neurophysiological patterns might only be indicative of transitory effects rather than consolidated subject learning.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [19]Kreilinger A, Kaiser V, Martin R, Leeb R, Rupp R, et al (2013) Neuroprosthesis Control via Noninvasive Hybrid Brain-Computer Interface. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28: 28– 43.
  2. [30]Jatzev S, Zander TO, DeFilippis M, Kothe C, Welke S, et al.. (2008) Examining causes for nonstationarities: the loss of controllability is a factor which induces non-stationarities. In: Proc. 4th Int. BCI Workshop and Training Course.
  3. [48]Bishop CM (2007) Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Faller, J., Scherer, R., Costa, U., Opisso, E., Medina, J., & Müller-Putz, G. R.
Affiliations
  • Graz University of Technology (AT)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
Corresponding author
Scherer, Reinhold
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-07-11
Volume
9
Issue
7
Pages
e101168
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1994043269
Cited by
55
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 6
FWCI
4.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
European Commission (247447)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
event-related desynchronization, severe motor impairment, self-calibration, outlier removal, linear discriminant analysis, motor imagery, assistive technology
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Movement Disorders, Young Adult, 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