Optimizing Performance of Non-Expert Users in Brain-Computer Interaction by Means of an Adaptive Performance Engine

Brain–Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are become increasingly more available at reduced costs and are being incorporated into immersive virtual environments and video games for serious applications. Most research in BCIs focused on signal processing techniques and has neglected the interaction aspect of BCIs. This has created an imbalance between BCI classification performance and online control quality of the BCI interaction. This results in user fatigue and loss of interest over time. In the health domain, BCIs provide a new way to overcome motor-related disabilities, promoting functional and structural plasticity in the brain. In order to exploit the advantages of BCIs in neurorehabilitation we need to maximize not only the classification performance of such systems but also engagement and the sense of competence of the user. Therefore, we argue that the primary goal should not be for users to be trained to successfully use a BCI system but to adapt the BCI interaction to each user in order to maximize the level of control on their actions, whatever their performance level is. To achieve this, we developed the Adaptive Performance Engine (APE) and tested with data from 20 naive BCI users. APE can provide user specific performance improvements up to approx. 20% and we compare it with previous methods. Finally, we contribute with an open motor-imagery datasets with 2400 trials from naive users.

[1]  G. R. Muller,et al.  Brain oscillations control hand orthosis in a tetraplegic , 2000, Neuroscience Letters.

[2]  B. Dobkin Brain–computer interface technology as a tool to augment plasticity and outcomes for neurological rehabilitation , 2007, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  Damien Coyle,et al.  Games, Gameplay, and BCI: The State of the Art , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games.

[4]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Brain-Computer Interface in Stroke Rehabilitation , 2013, J. Comput. Sci. Eng..

[5]  H. Flor,et al.  A spelling device for the paralysed , 1999, Nature.

[6]  Fabien Lotte,et al.  On the need for alternative feedback training approaches for BCI , 2012 .

[7]  Gernot R. Müller-Putz,et al.  EURASIP Journal on Applied Signal Processing 2005:19, 3152–3155 c ○ 2005 Hindawi Publishing Corporation EEG-Based Asynchronous BCI Controls Functional Electrical Stimulation in a Tetraplegic Patient , 2004 .

[8]  P. Verschure,et al.  Neurorehabilitation using the virtual reality based Rehabilitation Gaming System: methodology, design, psychometrics, usability and validation , 2010, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[9]  Gustavo Saposnik,et al.  Virtual Reality in Stroke Rehabilitation: a meta-analysis and practical implications for clinicians , 2011 .

[10]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Motor imagery BCI for upper limb stroke rehabilitation: An evaluation of the EEG recordings using coherence analysis , 2013, 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[11]  Febo Cincotti,et al.  EEG-based Brain-Computer Interface to support post-stroke motor rehabilitation of the upper limb , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

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

[13]  José del R. Millán,et al.  Brain-Controlled Wheelchairs: A Robotic Architecture , 2013, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

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

[15]  J. Deutsch,et al.  Cochrane review: virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. , 2012, European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine.

[16]  Steven Lemm,et al.  BCI competition 2003-data set III: probabilistic modeling of sensorimotor /spl mu/ rhythms for classification of imaginary hand movements , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[17]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  Graz-BCI: state of the art and clinical applications , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

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

[19]  Niels Birbaumer,et al.  Brain-computer-interfaces in the rehabilitation of stroke and neurotrauma , 2011 .

[20]  G. Prasad,et al.  Applying a brain-computer interface to support motor imagery practice in people with stroke for upper limb recovery: a feasibility study , 2010, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[21]  Christian Mühl,et al.  Flaws in current human training protocols for spontaneous Brain-Computer Interfaces: lessons learned from instructional design , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[22]  M. Molinari,et al.  Brain–computer interface boosts motor imagery practice during stroke recovery , 2015, Annals of neurology.

[23]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  Support vector EEG classification in the Fourier and time-frequency correlation domains , 2003, First International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 2003. Conference Proceedings..

[24]  H. Jasper Report of the committee on methods of clinical examination in electroencephalography , 1958 .

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

[26]  Desney S. Tan,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces and Human-Computer Interaction , 2010, Brain-Computer Interfaces.