Cited by 41EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyMuscle activation and electromyography studies

Benchmarking Brain-Computer Interfaces Outside the Laboratory: The Cybathlon 2016

Open access
Novak, Domen, Sigrist, Roland, Gerig, Nicolas J., Wyss, Dario, Bauer, René, Götz, Ulrich, Riener, Robert·2018·Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract

This paper presents a new approach to benchmarking brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) outside the lab. A computer game was created that mimics a real-world application of assistive BCIs, with the main outcome metric being the time needed to complete the game. This approach was used at the Cybathlon 2016, a competition for people with disabilities who use assistive technology to achieve tasks. The paper summarizes the technical challenges of BCIs, describes the design of the benchmarking game, then describes the rules for acceptable hardware, software and inclusion of human pilots in the BCI competition at the Cybathlon. The 11 participating teams, their approaches, and their results at the Cybathlon are presented. Though the benchmarking procedure has some limitations (for instance, we were unable to identify any factors that clearly contribute to BCI performance), it can be successfully used to analyze BCI performance in realistic, less structured conditions. In the future, the parameters of the benchmarking game could be modified to better mimic different applications (e.g., the need to use some commands more frequently than others). Furthermore, the Cybathlon has the potential to showcase such devices to the general public.

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 · 10.3389/fnins.2017.00756

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • A recent study analyzing the Cybathlon BCI race states that it was not possible to identify any factor (hardware, signal processing, machine learning, and pilot's conditions) explaining the performance.

    “In fact, a recent study analyzing the results of the Cybathlon BCI race states that it was not possible to identify any factor (hardware, signal processing, machine learning, and pilot’s conditions) explaining the performance [8].”
  • The impact of training with the BCI application might be related to a need for getting accustomed to the actual application demands but probably also to increased user motivation provided by the gaming application and the goal of participating in an international competition.

    “This might be related to a need for getting accustomed to the actual application demands [47] but probably also to increased user motivation [68] provided both by the gaming application and the goal of participating in an international competition [8].”
  • Differences in machine-learning methods of all participating teams were too subtle to explain the competition outcomes according to the organizers.

    “Of note, the differences in machine-learning methods of all participating teams were too subtle to explain the competition outcomes according to the organizers [8].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Novak, D., Sigrist, R., Gerig, N. J., Wyss, D., Bauer, R., Götz, U., & Riener, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Wyoming (US)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Zurich University of the Arts (CH)
Corresponding author
Novak, Domen
Venue
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Published
2018-01-11
Volume
11
Pages
756-756
ISSN
1662-453X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2782903092
Cited by
41
References
60
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Funders
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
  • Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
brain-computer interface, benchmarking, assistive technology, people with disabilities, real-world performance

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