Comparison of Sensor Selection Mechanisms for an ERP-Based Brain-Computer Interface

A major barrier for a broad applicability of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) based on electroencephalography (EEG) is the large number of EEG sensor electrodes typically used. The necessity for this results from the fact that the relevant information for the BCI is often spread over the scalp in complex patterns that differ depending on subjects and application scenarios. Recently, a number of methods have been proposed to determine an individual optimal sensor selection. These methods have, however, rarely been compared against each other or against any type of baseline. In this paper, we review several selection approaches and propose one additional selection criterion based on the evaluation of the performance of a BCI system using a reduced set of sensors. We evaluate the methods in the context of a passive BCI system that is designed to detect a P300 event-related potential and compare the performance of the methods against randomly generated sensor constellations. For a realistic estimation of the reduced system's performance we transfer sensor constellations found on one experimental session to a different session for evaluation. We identified notable (and unanticipated) differences among the methods and could demonstrate that the best method in our setup is able to reduce the required number of sensors considerably. Though our application focuses on EEG data, all presented algorithms and evaluation schemes can be transferred to any binary classification task on sensor arrays.

[1]  Elsa Andrea Kirchner,et al.  Rapid Adaptation of Brain Reading Interfaces based on Threshold Adjustment , 2010 .

[2]  Tian Lan,et al.  Salient EEG Channel Selection in Brain Computer Interfaces by Mutual Information Maximization , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

[3]  Selina Wriessnegger,et al.  Regularised CSP for Sensor Selection in BCI , 2006 .

[4]  Frank Kirchner,et al.  On transferring spatial filters in a brain reading scenario , 2011, 2011 IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP).

[5]  E. Kirchner,et al.  PERIODIC SPATIAL FILTER FOR SINGLE TRIAL CLASSIFICATION OF EVENT RELATED BRAIN ACTIVITY , 2013, BioMed 2013.

[6]  Joachim M. Buhmann,et al.  The Balanced Accuracy and Its Posterior Distribution , 2010, 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.

[7]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  Comparison of Dry and Gel Based Electrodes for P300 Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

[8]  Aixia Guo,et al.  Gene Selection for Cancer Classification using Support Vector Machines , 2014 .

[9]  Elsa Andrea Kirchner,et al.  Minimizing Calibration Time for Brain Reading , 2011, DAGM-Symposium.

[10]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Support vector channel selection in BCI , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  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.

[12]  E. Maby,et al.  Impact of Spatial Filters During Sensor Selection in a Visual P300 Brain-Computer Interface , 2011, Brain Topography.

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

[14]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  On Optimal Channel Configurations for SMR-based Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2010, Brain Topography.

[15]  M. Nuttin,et al.  Asynchronous non-invasive brain-actuated control of an intelligent wheelchair , 2009, 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[16]  S A Hillyard,et al.  P3 waves to the discrimination of targets in homogeneous and heterogeneous stimulus sequences. , 1977, Psychophysiology.

[17]  Fei Meng,et al.  A Minimal Set of Electrodes for Motor Imagery BCI to Control an Assistive Device in Chronic Stroke Subjects: A Multi-Session Study , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[18]  Ronald Phlypo,et al.  EEG sensor selection by sparse spatial filtering in P300 speller brain-computer interface , 2010, 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology.

[19]  Frank Kirchner,et al.  Towards Operator Monitoring via Brain Reading - An EEG-based Approach for Space Applications , 2010 .

[20]  Frank Kirchner,et al.  A Framework for High Performance Embedded Signal Processing and Classification of Psychophysiological Data , 2013 .

[21]  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.

[22]  Guillaume Gibert,et al.  xDAWN Algorithm to Enhance Evoked Potentials: Application to Brain–Computer Interface , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[23]  Yijun Wang,et al.  Common Spatial Pattern Method for Channel Selelction in Motor Imagery Based Brain-computer Interface , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

[24]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  Evolutionary feature selection and electrode reduction for EEG classification , 2012, 2012 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[25]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Optimizing the Channel Selection and Classification Accuracy in EEG-Based BCI , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[26]  S. Bonnet,et al.  Channel selection procedure using riemannian distance for BCI applications , 2011, 2011 5th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering.

[27]  Paul S. Bradley,et al.  Feature Selection via Concave Minimization and Support Vector Machines , 1998, ICML.

[28]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[29]  Michele Folgheraiter,et al.  Measuring the Improvement of the Interaction Comfort of a Wearable Exoskeleton , 2012, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[30]  Jeremy D. Slater,et al.  Quality assessment of electroencephalography obtained from a “dry electrode” system , 2012, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.