The Component Structure of Event-Related Potentials in the P300 Speller Paradigm

We investigated the componential structure of event-related potentials elicited while participants use the P300 BCI. Six healthy participants “typed” all characters in a 6 × 6 matrix twice in a random sequence. A principal component analysis indicated that in addition to the P300, target flashes elicited an earlier frontal positivity, possibly a Novelty P3. The amplitudes of both P300 and the Novelty P3 varied with the matrix row in which the target character was located. However, the P300 elicited by row flashes was largest for targets in the lower part of the matrix, whereas the Novelty P3 elicited by column flashes was largest in the top part. Classification accuracy using stepwise linear discriminant analysis mirrored the pattern in the Novelty P3 (an accuracy difference of 0.1 between rows 1 and 6). When separate classifiers were generated to rely solely on the P300 or solely on the Novelty P3, the latter function led to higher accuracy (a mean accuracy difference of about 0.2 between classifiers). A possible explanation is that some nontarget flashes elicit a P300, leading to lower selection accuracy of the respective classifier. In an additional set of data from six different participants we replicated the ERP structure of the initial analyses and characterized the spatial distributions more closely by using a dense electrode array. Overall, our findings provide new insights in the componential structure of ERPs elicited in the P300 speller paradigm and have important implications for optimizing the speller's selection accuracy.

[1]  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.

[2]  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.

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

[4]  A. Kübler,et al.  Flashing characters with famous faces improves ERP-based brain–computer interface performance , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

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

[6]  E. Donchin,et al.  Performance of concurrent tasks: a psychophysiological analysis of the reciprocity of information-processing resources. , 1983, Science.

[7]  M. Thulasidas,et al.  Optimization of BCI Speller Based on P300 Potential , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

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

[9]  D. Friedman,et al.  The effect of intention to learn novel, environmental sounds on the novelty P3 and old/new recognition memory , 1999, Biological Psychology.

[10]  Iñaki Iturrate,et al.  A Noninvasive Brain-Actuated Wheelchair Based on a P300 Neurophysiological Protocol and Automated Navigation , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[11]  E. Donchin Presidential address, 1980. Surprise!...Surprise? , 1981, Psychophysiology.

[12]  M Salvaris,et al.  Visual modifications on the P300 speller BCI paradigm , 2009, Journal of neural engineering.

[13]  Joseph Dien,et al.  The ERP PCA Toolkit: An open source program for advanced statistical analysis of event-related potential data , 2010, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[14]  E. Donchin,et al.  On quantifying surprise: the variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability. , 1977, Psychophysiology.

[15]  Brian A. Lopez,et al.  P3a from visual stimuli: task difficulty effects. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[16]  E. Donchin,et al.  The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[17]  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.

[18]  Christian Laugier,et al.  Controlling a Wheelchair Indoors Using Thought , 2007, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

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

[20]  Dennis J. McFarland,et al.  The P300-based brain–computer interface (BCI): Effects of stimulus rate , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[21]  Michael Bensch,et al.  Design and Implementation of a P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface for Controlling an Internet Browser , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[22]  Joseph Dien,et al.  Evaluating two-step PCA of ERP data with Geomin, Infomax, Oblimin, Promax, and Varimax rotations. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[23]  David Friedman,et al.  The old switcheroo: when target environmental sounds elicit a novelty P3 , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

[25]  E. Courchesne,et al.  Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

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

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

[28]  E. Donchin,et al.  Cognition and Event‐Related Potentials II. The Orienting Reflex and P300 , 1984, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[29]  I. A. Basyul,et al.  N1 wave in the P300 BCI is not sensitive to the physical characteristics of stimuli. , 2009, Journal of integrative neuroscience.

[30]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  A P300 event-related potential brain–computer interface (BCI): The effects of matrix size and inter stimulus interval on performance , 2006, Biological Psychology.

[31]  A. Engel,et al.  What is novel in the novelty oddball paradigm? Functional significance of the novelty P3 event-related potential as revealed by independent component analysis. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[32]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[33]  Eric W. Sellers,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of P300 Brain-Computer Interface and Progression of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis , 2011, HCI.

[34]  E. Donchin Multivariate analysis of event-related potential data: A tutorial review , 1978 .

[35]  E. Donchin,et al.  A componential analysis of the ERP elicited by novel events using a dense electrode array. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[36]  Y. Nakajima,et al.  Visual stimuli for the P300 brain–computer interface: A comparison of white/gray and green/blue flicker matrices , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[37]  R. Simons,et al.  On the relationship of P3a and the Novelty-P3 , 2001, Biological Psychology.

[38]  E. Donchin,et al.  COGNITIVE PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY: THE ENDOGENOUS COMPONENTS OF THE ERP , 1978 .

[39]  Brendan Z Allison,et al.  Effects of SOA and flash pattern manipulations on ERPs, performance, and preference: implications for a BCI system. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[40]  E. Donchin,et al.  A multivariate approach to the analysis of average evoked potentials. , 1966, IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering.

[41]  E. Donchin,et al.  Parsing the late positive complex: mental chronometry and the ERP components that inhabit the neighborhood of the P300. , 2004, Psychophysiology.

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

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

[44]  B.Z. Allison,et al.  ERPs evoked by different matrix sizes: implications for a brain computer interface (BCI) system , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[45]  N. Squires,et al.  Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[46]  R. Heuser Surprise, surprise , 2014, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.