Brain Evoked Potential Latencies Optimization for Spatial Auditory Brain–Computer Interface

We propose a novel method for the extraction of discriminative features in electroencephalography (EEG) evoked potential latency. Based on our offline results, we present evidence indicating that a full surround sound auditory brain–computer interface (BCI) paradigm has potential for an online application. The auditory spatial BCI concept is based on an eight-directional audio stimuli delivery technique, developed by our group, which employs a loudspeaker array in an octagonal horizontal plane. The stimuli presented to the subjects vary in frequency and timbre. To capture brain responses, we utilize an eight-channel EEG system. We propose a methodology for finding and optimizing evoked response latencies in the P300 range in order later to classify them correctly and to elucidate the subject’s chosen targets or ignored non-targets. To accomplish the above, we propose an approach based on an analysis of variance for feature selection. Finally, we identify the subjects’ intended commands with a Naive Bayesian classifier for sorting the final responses. The results obtained with ten subjects in offline BCI experiments support our research hypothesis by providing higher classification results and an improved information transfer rate compared with state-of-the-art solutions.

[1]  Hiroko Terasawa,et al.  Sound Timbre and Spatial Location as Informative Cues in Auditory BCI - Brain Evoked Potential Enhan , 2011 .

[2]  Benjamin Blankertz,et al.  A Novel 9-Class Auditory ERP Paradigm Driving a Predictive Text Entry System , 2011, Front. Neurosci..

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

[4]  Thomas G. Dietterich What is machine learning? , 2020, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[5]  Benjamin Blankertz,et al.  Two-dimensional auditory p300 speller with predictive text system , 2010, 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology.

[6]  D. Cohen Magnetoencephalography: Evidence of Magnetic Fields Produced by Alpha-Rhythm Currents , 1968, Science.

[7]  Michael Tangermann,et al.  Listen, You are Writing! Speeding up Online Spelling with a Dynamic Auditory BCI , 2011, Front. Neurosci..

[8]  D. M. Green,et al.  Sound localization by human listeners. , 1991, Annual review of psychology.

[9]  Tom Fawcett,et al.  An introduction to ROC analysis , 2006, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[10]  Tomasz M. Rutkowski Auditory Brain-Computer/Machine-Interface Paradigms Design , 2011, HAID.

[11]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2010 .

[12]  A Belitski,et al.  P300 audio-visual speller , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

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

[14]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Neurophysiological investigation of the basis of the fMRI signal , 2001, Nature.

[15]  D. Cohen Magnetoencephalography: Detection of the Brain's Electrical Activity with a Superconducting Magnetometer , 1972, Science.

[16]  Andrzej Cichocki,et al.  Spatial auditory paradigms for brain computer/machine interfacing , 2009 .

[17]  José del R. Millán,et al.  Evaluation Criteria for BCI Research , 2007 .

[18]  Marissa L. Gamble,et al.  N2ac: an ERP component associated with the focusing of attention within an auditory scene. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[19]  R. Zatorre,et al.  Shifting and focusing auditory spatial attention. , 1995 .

[20]  Valer Jurcak,et al.  10/20, 10/10, and 10/5 systems revisited: Their validity as relative head-surface-based positioning systems , 2007, NeuroImage.

[21]  Adam M. Croom Auditory Neuroscience: Making Sense of Sound , 2014 .

[22]  J. Huggins,et al.  What would brain-computer interface users want? Opinions and priorities of potential users with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2011, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis : official publication of the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Motor Neuron Diseases.

[23]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces: Principles and Practice , 2012 .

[24]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  An Auditory Paradigm for Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2004, NIPS.

[25]  A. Villringer,et al.  Non-invasive optical spectroscopy and imaging of human brain function , 1997, Trends in Neurosciences.

[26]  José del R. Millán,et al.  Towards Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2007 .

[27]  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.

[28]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  An auditory oddball brain–computer interface for binary choices , 2010, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[29]  D. L. Schomer,et al.  Niedermeyer's Electroencephalography: Basic Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields , 2012 .

[30]  E. Donchin,et al.  Brain-computer interface research at the university of south Florida cognitive psychophysiology laboratory: the P300 speller , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[31]  B. Blankertz,et al.  A New Auditory Multi-Class Brain-Computer Interface Paradigm: Spatial Hearing as an Informative Cue , 2010, PloS one.

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

[33]  S. Luck An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique , 2005 .

[34]  Andrzej Cichocki,et al.  Spatial Auditory BCI/BMI Paradigm - Multichannel EMD Approach to Brain Responses Estimation , 2010 .