Reduced Burden of Individual Calibration Process in Brain-Computer Interface by Clustering the Subjects based on Brain Activation

Electroencephalography (EEG) is the primary modality for estimating the user intention in brain-computer interface (BCI). However, the suppression of the inter-subject variability (ISV) remains as a major challenge in constructing a reliable EEG-based BCI model. Subject-specific classification models have been widely used to avoid ISV, however these inherently involve time-consuming individual calibration process. This study speculated that the calibration could be minimized via clustering BCI subjects into subgroups by their respective similarity in brain power distribution at the resting state and conducted a proof-of-concept investigation. EEG recordings of twenty-nine healthy subjects from open motor imagery (MI) dataset were used in this study. K-means clustering based on brain activation in $\alpha$, low $\beta$ and high $\beta$-band at resting state divided the subjects into three subgroups. The efficacy of band-clustering was evaluated by comparing its MI classification performance (left- or right-hand gripping) to subject-specific and general models. Among the subjects in a cluster, ISV was lower than that in twenty-nine subjects, especially in the $\alpha$-band. The MI classification accuracy using the cluster-specific model on the $\alpha$-band was marked high performance (median accuracy 68.8%). The cluster-specific model had significantly high accuracy compared to general model (median accuracy = 64.6%). Furthermore, the difference of MI classification accuracy between the cluster-specific model on the $\alpha$ band and subject-specific model is not significant (median accuracy = 69.3%). Consequently, establishing a model by grouping clusters using similar brain activation patterns was highly beneficial for the MI classification without individual calibration process.

[1]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Calibrating EEG-based motor imagery brain-computer interface from passive movement , 2011, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[2]  Mingzhou Ding,et al.  Coupling between visual alpha oscillations and default mode activity , 2013, NeuroImage.

[3]  Giampaolo Brichetto,et al.  Resting‐state functional connectivity and motor imagery brain activation , 2016, Human brain mapping.

[4]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  The Berlin Brain-Computer Interface: Progress Beyond Communication and Control , 2016, Front. Neurosci..

[5]  W. Klimesch EEG-alpha rhythms and memory processes. , 1997, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[6]  Kai Keng Ang,et al.  Modeling EEG-based Motor Imagery with Session to Session Online Adaptation , 2018, 2018 40th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[7]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  EEG-based discrimination between imagination of right and left hand movement. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[8]  Simanto Saha,et al.  Enhanced inter-subject brain computer interface with associative sensorimotor oscillations , 2017, Healthcare technology letters.

[9]  Jichai Jeong,et al.  Dataset for EEG + NIRS Single-Trial Classification , 2022 .

[10]  Mahnaz Arvaneh,et al.  Subject-to-subject adaptation to reduce calibration time in motor imagery-based brain-computer interface , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[11]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  The non-invasive Berlin Brain–Computer Interface: Fast acquisition of effective performance in untrained subjects , 2007, NeuroImage.

[12]  Sofya Liburkina,et al.  Assessing motor imagery in brain-computer interface training: Psychological and neurophysiological correlates , 2017, Neuropsychologia.

[13]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Comparing support vector machines with Gaussian kernels to radial basis function classifiers , 1997, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[14]  T. Mulder Motor imagery and action observation: cognitive tools for rehabilitation , 2007, Journal of Neural Transmission.

[15]  Simanto Saha,et al.  Evidence of Variabilities in EEG Dynamics During Motor Imagery-Based Multiclass Brain–Computer Interface , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[16]  Huosheng Hu,et al.  Support Vector Machine-Based Classification Scheme for Myoelectric Control Applied to Upper Limb , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[17]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  A Practical Guide to Support Vector Classication , 2008 .

[18]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

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

[20]  Joni Dambre,et al.  Reducing BCI calibration time with transfer learning: a shrinkage approach , 2016 .

[21]  Yunsik Son,et al.  Classification of computed tomography scanner manufacturer using support vector machine , 2017, 2017 5th International Winter Conference on Brain-Computer Interface (BCI).

[22]  Omer Tal,et al.  The amplitude of the resting state fMRI global signal is related to EEG vigilance measures , 2013 .