EEG-Based Brain-Computer Interfaces.

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are real-time computer-based systems that translate brain signals into useful commands. To date most applications have been demonstrations of proof-of-principle; widespread use by people who could benefit from this technology requires further development. Improvements in current EEG recording technology are needed. Better sensors would be easier to apply, more confortable for the user, and produce higher quality and more stable signals. Although considerable effort has been devoted to evaluating classifiers using public datasets, more attention to real-time signal processing issues and to optimizing the mutually adaptive interaction between the brain and the BCI are essential for improving BCI performance. Further development of applications is also needed, particularly applications of BCI technology to rehabilitation. The design of rehabilitation applications hinges on the nature of BCI control and how it might be used to induce and guide beneficial plasticity in the brain.

[1]  Chadwick Boulay,et al.  Therapeutic Applications of BCI Technologies. , 2017, Brain computer interfaces.

[2]  Bin He,et al.  Brain–Computer Interfaces Using Sensorimotor Rhythms: Current State and Future Perspectives , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  Dennis J. McFarland,et al.  Should the parameters of a BCI translation algorithm be continually adapted? , 2011, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[4]  Owen Falzon,et al.  The analytic common spatial patterns method for EEG-based BCI data , 2012, Journal of neural engineering.

[5]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  BCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[6]  W. A. Sarnacki,et al.  Electroencephalographic (EEG) control of three-dimensional movement , 2010, Journal of neural engineering.

[7]  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.

[8]  Dean J Krusienski,et al.  A comparison of classification techniques for the P300 Speller , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[9]  Jonathan R Wolpaw,et al.  Effects of training pre-movement sensorimotor rhythms on behavioral performance , 2015, Journal of neural engineering.

[10]  Minyou Chen,et al.  EEG based zero-phase phase-locking value (PLV) and effects of spatial filtering during actual movement , 2017, Brain Research Bulletin.

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

[12]  Yael Arbel,et al.  Bcis That Use P 300 Event-related Potentials , 2012 .

[13]  Ad Aertsen,et al.  Review of the BCI Competition IV , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

[14]  T. Egner,et al.  Foundation and Practice of Neurofeedback for the Treatment of Epilepsy , 2006, Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback.

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

[16]  Andrew Schwartz,et al.  Dynamic range adaptation in primary motor cortical populations , 2017, eLife.

[17]  Amir Rastegarnia,et al.  Methods for artifact detection and removal from scalp EEG: A review , 2016, Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology.

[18]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  A convolutional neural network for steady state visual evoked potential classification under ambulatory environment , 2017, PloS one.

[19]  David Sussillo,et al.  Making brain–machine interfaces robust to future neural variability , 2016, Nature Communications.

[20]  Chang S. Nam,et al.  The Human Factors and Ergonomics of P300-Based Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2015, Brain sciences.

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

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

[23]  D J McFarland,et al.  BCI in practice. , 2016, Progress in brain research.

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

[25]  Eric W. Sellers,et al.  Noninvasive brain-computer interface enables communication after brainstem stroke , 2014, Science Translational Medicine.

[26]  D J McFarland,et al.  An EEG-based brain-computer interface for cursor control. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[27]  J J Vidal,et al.  Toward direct brain-computer communication. , 1973, Annual review of biophysics and bioengineering.

[28]  Sayeed A. D. Kizuk,et al.  High and dry? Comparing active dry EEG electrodes to active and passive wet electrodes. , 2017, Psychophysiology.

[29]  Niels Birbaumer,et al.  Residual Upper Arm Motor Function Primes Innervation of Paretic Forearm Muscles in Chronic Stroke after Brain-Machine Interface (BMI) Training , 2015, PloS one.

[30]  D. Tucker,et al.  Scalp electrode impedance, infection risk, and EEG data quality , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

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

[33]  Anthony J. Ries,et al.  Usability of four commercially-oriented EEG systems , 2014, Journal of neural engineering.

[34]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Ensembles of adaptive spatial filters increase BCI performance: an online evaluation , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[35]  L. Cohen,et al.  Brain–machine interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: A controlled study , 2013, Annals of neurology.

[36]  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.

[37]  G. Wulf,et al.  Optimizing motivation and attention for motor performance and learning. , 2017, Current opinion in psychology.

[38]  Ricardo Chavarriaga,et al.  Workshops of the Fifth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting: Defining the Future. , 2014, Brain computer interfaces.

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

[40]  Jane E Huggins,et al.  Brain-computer interface users speak up: the Virtual Users' Forum at the 2013 International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting. , 2015, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[41]  Mark L. Homer,et al.  Sensors and decoding for intracortical brain computer interfaces. , 2013, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[42]  J. A. Wilson,et al.  Two-dimensional movement control using electrocorticographic signals in humans , 2008, Journal of neural engineering.

[43]  C. Neuper,et al.  Learning to modulate one's own brain activity: the effect of spontaneous mental strategies , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[44]  Jonathan R Wolpaw,et al.  Control of a two-dimensional movement signal by a noninvasive brain-computer interface in humans. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  Yael Arbel,et al.  BCIs that use P300 Event Related Potentials , 2012 .

[46]  Anton Nijholt,et al.  Usability of Three Electroencephalogram Headsets for Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Within Subject Comparison , 2015, Interact. Comput..

[47]  D. Orlikowski,et al.  A comparison of recording modalities of P300 event-related potentials (ERP) for brain-computer interface (BCI) paradigm , 2013, Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology.

[48]  C. Neuper,et al.  Toward a high-throughput auditory P300-based brain–computer interface , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[49]  Theresa M. Vaughan,et al.  A Novel Dry Electrode for Brain-Computer Interface , 2009, HCI.

[50]  Muhammad Abd-El-Barr,et al.  Long-term Training With a Brain-Machine Interface-Based Gait Protocol Induces Partial Neurological Recovery in Paraplegic Patients. , 2016, Neurosurgery.

[51]  Gert Pfurtscheller,et al.  BCIs That Use Sensorimotor Rhythms , 2012 .

[52]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces in neurological rehabilitation , 2008, The Lancet Neurology.

[53]  D. J. McFarland,et al.  Trained modulation of sensorimotor rhythms can affect reaction time , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[54]  David M. Huberdeau,et al.  Dual-process decomposition in human sensorimotor adaptation , 2015, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[55]  Gordon Cheng,et al.  Long-Term Training with a Brain-Machine Interface-Based Gait Protocol Induces Partial Neurological Recovery in Paraplegic Patients , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[56]  Bin He,et al.  EEG Source Imaging Enhances the Decoding of Complex Right-Hand Motor Imagery Tasks , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.