A Comparison of Two Spelling Brain-Computer Interfaces Based on Visual P3 and SSVEP in Locked-In Syndrome

Objectives We study the applicability of a visual P3-based and a Steady State Visually Evoked Potentials (SSVEP)-based Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) for mental text spelling on a cohort of patients with incomplete Locked-In Syndrome (LIS). Methods Seven patients performed repeated sessions with each BCI. We assessed BCI performance, mental workload and overall satisfaction for both systems. We also investigated the effect of the quality of life and level of motor impairment on the performance. Results All seven patients were able to achieve an accuracy of 70% or more with the SSVEP-based BCI, compared to 3 patients with the P3-based BCI, showing a better performance with the SSVEP BCI than with the P3 BCI in the studied cohort. Moreover, the better performance of the SSVEP-based BCI was accompanied by a lower mental workload and a higher overall satisfaction. No relationship was found between BCI performance and level of motor impairment or quality of life. Conclusion Our results show a better usability of the SSVEP-based BCI than the P3-based one for the sessions performed by the tested population of locked-in patients with respect to all the criteria considered. The study shows the advantage of developing alternative BCIs with respect to the traditional matrix-based P3 speller using different designs and signal modalities such as SSVEPs to build a faster, more accurate, less mentally demanding and more satisfying BCI by testing both types of BCIs on a convenience sample of LIS patients.

[1]  M. Vázquez-Marrufo,et al.  Retest Reliability of Individual P3 Topography Assessed by High Density Electroencephalography , 2013, PloS one.

[2]  Steven Laureys,et al.  Brain–computer interfacing in disorders of consciousness , 2012, Brain injury.

[3]  M. Castelo‐Branco,et al.  Comparison of a row-column speller vs. a novel lateral single-character speller: Assessment of BCI for severe motor disabled patients , 2012, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[4]  Sangwoo Bahn,et al.  Severe motor disability affects functional cortical integration in the context of brain–computer interface (BCI) use , 2012, Ergonomics.

[5]  F. Babiloni,et al.  A covert attention P300-based brain–computer interface: Geospell , 2012, Ergonomics.

[6]  Thomas Gruber,et al.  Influences of encoding and retrieval on the steady-state visual evoked potential , 2012, Neuroreport.

[7]  M. Tsai,et al.  Auditory event-related potentials in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. , 2012, Pediatrics and neonatology.

[8]  Arne Robben,et al.  Towards the detection of error-related potentials and its integration in the context of a P300 speller brain-computer interface , 2012, Neurocomputing.

[9]  Arne Robben,et al.  Subject-adaptive steady-state visual evoked potential detection for brain-computer interface , 2011, Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems.

[10]  R. Ortner,et al.  Accuracy of a P300 Speller for People with Motor Impairments: A Comparison , 2011 .

[11]  Reza Fazel-Rezai,et al.  A Comparison among Several P300 Brain-Computer Interface Speller Paradigms , 2011, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[12]  Steven Laureys,et al.  Design of a novel covert SSVEP-based BCI , 2011 .

[13]  Marc M. Van Hulle,et al.  Comparison of Classification Methods for P300 Brain-Computer Interface on Disabled Subjects , 2011, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[14]  M. Tsolaki,et al.  Cognitive event-related potentials: Longitudinal changes in mild cognitive impairment , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[15]  Katrien Vanderperren,et al.  Steady State Visual Evoked Potential (SSVEP) - Based Brain Spelling System with Synchronous and Asynchronous Typing Modes , 2011 .

[16]  Dennis J. McFarland,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[17]  Xingyu Wang,et al.  An adaptive P300-based control system , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[18]  J. W. Minett,et al.  Optimizing the P300-based brain–computer interface: current status, limitations and future directions , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[19]  Søren K. Andersen,et al.  Effects of Feature-selective and Spatial Attention at Different Stages of Visual Processing , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  A. Kübler,et al.  ERPs contributing to classification in the ”P300” BCI , 2011 .

[21]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  Toward BCI Wizard - best BCI approach for each user , 2010, 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology.

[22]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  Does the ‘P300’ speller depend on eye gaze? , 2010, Journal of neural engineering.

[23]  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.

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

[25]  B. Blankertz,et al.  (C)overt attention and visual speller design in an ERP-based brain-computer interface , 2010, Behavioral and Brain Functions.

[26]  L. R. Quitadamo,et al.  Which Physiological Components are More Suitable for Visual ERP Based Brain–Computer Interface? A Preliminary MEG/EEG Study , 2010, Brain Topography.

[27]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  The Influence of Psychological State and Motivation on Brain–Computer Interface Performance in Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis – a Longitudinal Study , 2010, Front. Neuropharma..

[28]  A. Cichocki,et al.  Steady-state visually evoked potentials: Focus on essential paradigms and future perspectives , 2010, Progress in Neurobiology.

[29]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  Could Anyone Use a BCI? , 2010, Brain-Computer Interfaces.

[30]  E. Sellers,et al.  How many people are able to control a P300-based brain–computer interface (BCI)? , 2009, Neuroscience Letters.

[31]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  Impact of Frequency Selection on LCD Screens for SSVEP Based Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2009, IWANN.

[32]  Giuseppe Andreoni,et al.  A Robust and Self-Paced BCI System Based on a Four Class SSVEP Paradigm: Algorithms and Protocols for a High-Transfer-Rate Direct Brain Communication , 2009, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[33]  P. Tonin,et al.  P300-Based Brain–Computer Interface Communication: Evaluation and Follow-up in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis , 2009, Front. Neuropro..

[34]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: Extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients? , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

[36]  Steve Majerus,et al.  Cognitive function in the locked-in syndrome , 2008, Journal of Neurology.

[37]  E. W. Sellers,et al.  Toward enhanced P300 speller performance , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[38]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  An efficient P300-based brain–computer interface for disabled subjects , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[39]  Gérard Rondouin,et al.  Diagnostic Value of Event-Related Evoked Potentials N200 and P300 Subcomponents in Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment , 2007, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[40]  J Artieda,et al.  Topography of cortical activation differs for fundamental and harmonic frequencies of the steady-state visual-evoked responses. An EEG and PET H215O study. , 2007, Cerebral cortex.

[41]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  Multiple Channel Detection of Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials for Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

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

[43]  E. Donchin,et al.  A P300-based brain–computer interface: Initial tests by ALS patients , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[44]  F. Piccione,et al.  P300-based brain computer interface: Reliability and performance in healthy and paralysed participants , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[45]  Refet Firat Yazicioglu,et al.  Low-Power Low-Noise 8-Channel EEG Front-End ASIC for Ambulatory Acquisition Systems , 2006, 2006 Proceedings of the 32nd European Solid-State Circuits Conference.

[46]  D. Linden.  The P300: Where in the Brain Is It Produced and What Does It Tell Us? , 2005, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[47]  S. Sathiya Keerthi,et al.  A Modified Finite Newton Method for Fast Solution of Large Scale Linear SVMs , 2005, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[48]  Alain Rakotomamonjy,et al.  Ensemble of SVMs for Improving Brain Computer Interface P300 Speller Performances , 2005, ICANN.

[49]  G.F. Inbar,et al.  An improved P300-based brain-computer interface , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[50]  Steven Laureys,et al.  The locked-in syndrome : what is it like to be conscious but paralyzed and voiceless? , 2005, Progress in brain research.

[51]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  High performance P300 speller for brain-computer interface , 2004, IEEE International Workshop on Biomedical Circuits and Systems, 2004..

[52]  F. Gerstenbrand,et al.  Varieties of the locked-in syndrome , 1979, Journal of Neurology.

[53]  Robert Dale,et al.  User Response to Speech Recognition Errors: Consistency of Behaviour Across Domains , 2004 .

[54]  J. Masdeu,et al.  Human Cerebral Activation during Steady-State Visual-Evoked Responses , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[55]  A. H Kemp,et al.  Cortical neurophysiology of anticipatory anxiety: an investigation utilizing steady state probe topography (SSPT) , 2003, NeuroImage.

[56]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  How many people are able to operate an EEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI)? , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[57]  W. A. Sarnacki,et al.  Brain–computer interface (BCI) operation: optimizing information transfer rates , 2003, Biological Psychology.

[58]  A. Mazzucchi,et al.  Locked-in syndrome: improvement in the prognosis after an early intensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation. , 2003, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[59]  W. Perlstein,et al.  Steady-state visual evoked potentials reveal frontally-mediated working memory activity in humans , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[60]  C. Herrmann.  Human EEG responses to 1–100 Hz flicker: resonance phenomena in visual cortex and their potential correlation to cognitive phenomena , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[61]  Pierre Legendre,et al.  Comparison of permutation methods for the partial correlation and partial mantel tests , 2000 .

[62]  E Donchin,et al.  The mental prosthesis: assessing the speed of a P300-based brain-computer interface. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[63]  E Donchin,et al.  Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[64]  Nello Cristianini,et al.  An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-based Learning Methods , 2000 .

[65]  Andy P. Field,et al.  Discovering Statistics Using SPSS , 2000 .

[66]  J. Cedarbaum,et al.  The ALSFRS-R: a revised ALS functional rating scale that incorporates assessments of respiratory function , 1999, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[67]  J. Bernheim.  How to get serious answers to the serious question: "How have you been?": subjective quality of life (QOL) as an individual experiential emergent construct. , 1999, Bioethics.

[68]  J. Polich,et al.  P3a and P3b from typical auditory and visual stimuli , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[69]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[70]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[71]  William F. Moroney,et al.  A comparison of two scoring procedures with the NASA task load index in a simulated flight task , 1992, Proceedings of the IEEE 1992 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference@m_NAECON 1992.

[72]  Thomas E. Nygren,et al.  Psychometric Properties of Subjective Workload Measurement Techniques: Implications for Their Use in the Assessment of Perceived Mental Workload , 1991 .

[73]  Shuichi Kato,et al.  Total manifestations of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ALS in the totally locked-in state , 1989, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[74]  Susan G. Hill,et al.  Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: Are paired comparisons necessary? In A , 1989 .

[75]  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.

[76]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[77]  M. Grabois,et al.  Locked-in syndrome: a review of 139 cases. , 1986, Stroke.

[78]  W. Pritchard.  Psychophysiology of P300. , 1981, Psychological bulletin.

[79]  D. Regan.  Some characteristics of average steady-state and transient responses evoked by modulated light. , 1966, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[80]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

[81]  R. Shah,et al.  Least Squares Support Vector Machines , 2022 .