Rethinking BCI Paradigm and Machine Learning Algorithm as a Symbiosis: Zero Calibration, Guaranteed Convergence and High Decoding Performance

In the past, the decoding quality of brain-computer interface (BCI) systems was often enhanced by independently improving either the machine learning algorithms or the BCI paradigms. We propose to take a novel perspective instead by optimizing the whole system, paradigm and decoder, jointly. To exemplify this holistic idea, we introduce learning from label proportions (LLP) as a new classification approach and prove its value for visual event-related potential (ERP) signals of the EEG. LLP utilizes the existence of subgroups with different label proportions in the data. This leads to a conceptually simple BCI system which combines previously unseen capabilities: (1) it does not require calibration and learns from unlabeled data, (2) under i.i.d. conditions, LLP is guaranteed to obtain the optimal decoder for online data, (3) under violation of stationarity assumptions, LLP can continuously adapt to the changing data, and (4) it can, in practice, replace a traditional supervised decoder when combined with an expectation-maximization algorithm.

[1]  Yijun Wang,et al.  Visual and Auditory Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[2]  Benjamin Schrauwen,et al.  A Bayesian Model for Exploiting Application Constraints to Enable Unsupervised Training of a P300-based BCI , 2012, PloS one.

[3]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  Optimizing event-related potential based brain-computer interfaces: a systematic evaluation of dynamic stopping methods. , 2013, Journal of neural engineering.

[4]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Subject-independent mental state classification in single trials , 2009, Neural Networks.

[5]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Learning from label proportions in brain-computer interfaces: Online unsupervised learning with guarantees , 2017, PloS one.

[6]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Towards adaptive classification for BCI , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[7]  Zafer Aydin,et al.  A signal processing application in genomic research: protein secondary structure prediction , 2006 .

[8]  B. Blankertz,et al.  A New Auditory Multi-Class Brain-Computer Interface Paradigm: Spatial Hearing as an Informative Cue , 2010, PloS one.

[9]  Michael Tangermann,et al.  Mixing two Unsupervised estimators for Event-Related potential decoding: an Online Evaluation , 2017, GBCIC.

[10]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Towards Zero Training for Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2008, PloS one.

[11]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Learning From More Than One Data Source: Data Fusion Techniques for Sensorimotor Rhythm-Based Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2015, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[12]  Michael Tangermann,et al.  Listen, You are Writing! Speeding up Online Spelling with a Dynamic Auditory BCI , 2011, Front. Neurosci..

[13]  S. Luck An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique , 2005 .

[14]  T Verhoeven,et al.  Towards a symbiotic brain–computer interface: exploring the application–decoder interaction , 2015, Journal of neural engineering.

[15]  A. Kübler,et al.  Flashing characters with famous faces improves ERP-based brain–computer interface performance , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[16]  Roderick Murray-Smith,et al.  Optimized stimulation events for a visual ERP BCI , 2011 .

[17]  Motoaki Kawanabe,et al.  Toward Unsupervised Adaptation of LDA for Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[18]  E. Donchin,et al.  Talking off the top of your head: toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  True Zero-Training Brain-Computer Interfacing – An Online Study , 2014, PloS one.

[20]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Integrating dynamic stopping, transfer learning and language models in an adaptive zero-training ERP speller , 2014, Journal of neural engineering.

[21]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Transfer Learning in Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2015, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[22]  M Congedo,et al.  A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain–computer interfaces , 2007, Journal of neural engineering.

[23]  Tao Liu,et al.  N200-speller using motion-onset visual response , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[24]  Michael Tangermann,et al.  Improving Learning from Label proportions by Reducing the Feature Dimensionality , 2017, GBCIC.

[25]  Alexander J. Smola,et al.  Estimating labels from label proportions , 2008, ICML '08.

[26]  Ricardo Chavarriaga,et al.  To Err Is Human: Learning from Error Potentials in Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2007 .

[27]  C. Neuper,et al.  Combining Brain–Computer Interfaces and Assistive Technologies: State-of-the-Art and Challenges , 2010, Front. Neurosci..

[28]  Tzyy-Ping Jung,et al.  High-speed spelling with a noninvasive brain–computer interface , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Klaus Gramann,et al.  Neuroadaptive technology enables implicit cursor control based on medial prefrontal cortex activity , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  T Verhoeven,et al.  Improving zero-training brain-computer interfaces by mixing model estimators , 2017, Journal of neural engineering.

[31]  Fabien Lotte,et al.  Towards improved BCI based on human learning principles , 2015, The 3rd International Winter Conference on Brain-Computer Interface.

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

[33]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Brain-computer communication: self-regulation of slow cortical potentials for verbal communication. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[34]  Jaime Gómez Gil,et al.  Brain Computer Interfaces, a Review , 2012, Sensors.

[35]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Toward noninvasive brain-computer interfaces , 2006, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[36]  Ricardo Chavarriaga,et al.  Teaching brain-machine interfaces as an alternative paradigm to neuroprosthetics control , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[37]  Yijun Wang,et al.  A high-speed BCI based on code modulation VEP , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[38]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Classifying Single Trial EEG: Towards Brain Computer Interfacing , 2001, NIPS.

[39]  Gert Pfurtscheller,et al.  Motor imagery and direct brain-computer communication , 2001, Proc. IEEE.

[40]  Benjamin Blankertz,et al.  Data driven neuroergonomic optimization of BCI stimuli , 2011 .

[41]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  Single-trial analysis and classification of ERP components — A tutorial , 2011, NeuroImage.

[42]  K.-R. Muller,et al.  Optimizing Spatial filters for Robust EEG Single-Trial Analysis , 2008, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[43]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  A novel P300-based brain–computer interface stimulus presentation paradigm: Moving beyond rows and columns , 2010, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[44]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Machine learning for real-time single-trial EEG-analysis: From brain–computer interfacing to mental state monitoring , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.