A hybrid brain-computer interface combining the EEG and NIRS

Compared to the conventional brain-computer interface (BCI) system, the hybrid BCI provides a more efficient way for the communication between the brain and the external device. The Electroencephalography (EEG) signal and the change of oxygenation in the brain are two prevailing approaches used in the BCI. However, single physiological signal couldn't provide enough information for a satisfied BCI. This paper proposes a hybrid BCI system based on the combination of the EEG signal and the cerebral blood oxygen changes measured by the near-infrared spectroscopy system (NIRS) to detect the state of motor imagery (MI). The result shows that the average recognition rate can achieve above 75.04% and the highest rate 91.11%, which are higher than when only using EEG or NIRS. It suggests that the proposed hybrid BCI system has a good performance in the combination of these two different signals. Further investigation may help develop better BCIs with high accuracy and significant efficiency.

[1]  S. Silvoni,et al.  Brain-Computer Interface in Stroke: A Review of Progress , 2011, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[2]  Thilo Hinterberger,et al.  An Auditory Brain-Computer Interface Based on the Self-Regulation of Slow Cortical Potentials , 2005, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[3]  Shangkai Gao,et al.  An Auditory Brain–Computer Interface Using Active Mental Response , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[4]  B. Scholkopf,et al.  Attention modulation of auditory event-related potentials in a brain-computer interface , 2004, IEEE International Workshop on Biomedical Circuits and Systems, 2004..

[5]  Sarah D Power,et al.  Automatic single-trial discrimination of mental arithmetic, mental singing and the no-control state from prefrontal activity: toward a three-state NIRS-BCI , 2012, BMC Research Notes.

[6]  E. Basar,et al.  Detection of P300 Waves in Single Trials by the Wavelet Transform (WT) , 1999, Brain and Language.

[7]  C. Neuper,et al.  Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain–computer interface training: the impact on motor cortical responsiveness , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[8]  C. Neuper,et al.  Toward a high-throughput auditory P300-based brain–computer interface , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[9]  Jonathan R Wolpaw,et al.  A brain-computer interface for long-term independent home use , 2010, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis : official publication of the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Motor Neuron Diseases.

[10]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  A P300-based brain–computer interface for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[11]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Enhanced Performance by a Hybrid Nirs–eeg Brain Computer Interface , 2022 .

[12]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  A brain–computer interface tool to assess cognitive functions in completely paralyzed patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[13]  C. Richards,et al.  Potential role of mental practice using motor imagery in neurologic rehabilitation. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  D.J. McFarland,et al.  The wadsworth BCI research and development program: at home with BCI , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[15]  E. Basar,et al.  Theta rhythmicities following expected visual and auditory targets. , 1992, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[16]  Febo Cincotti,et al.  Tools for Brain-Computer Interaction: A General Concept for a Hybrid BCI , 2011, Front. Neuroinform..

[17]  E. Donchin,et al.  Brain-computer interface research at the university of south Florida cognitive psychophysiology laboratory: the P300 speller , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[18]  Sjoerd J de Vries,et al.  Motor imagery and stroke rehabilitation: a critical discussion. , 2007, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[19]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  SSVEP-based Bremen–BCI interface—boosting information transfer rates , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[20]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[21]  E. Basar,et al.  Wavelet analysis of oddball P300. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[22]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication and Control. , 2011, Communications of the ACM.

[23]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  The Hybrid BCI , 2010, Frontiers in Neuroscience.

[24]  M. Jeannerod.  Neural Simulation of Action: A Unifying Mechanism for Motor Cognition , 2001, NeuroImage.

[25]  C Neuper,et al.  A comparison of three brain–computer interfaces based on event-related desynchronization, steady state visual evoked potentials, or a hybrid approach using both signals , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[26]  Müjdat Çetin,et al.  A latent discriminative model-based approach for classification of imaginary motor tasks from EEG data , 2012, Journal of neural engineering.

[27]  Ingrid Daubechies,et al.  The wavelet transform, time-frequency localization and signal analysis , 1990, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[28]  T. Mulder,et al.  Observation, imagination and execution of an effortful movement: more evidence for a central explanation of motor imagery , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[29]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  An auditory oddball brain–computer interface for binary choices , 2010, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[30]  Christian Kothe,et al.  Towards passive brain–computer interfaces: applying brain–computer interface technology to human–machine systems in general , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.