Intersession adaptation of the EEG-based detector of self-paced walking intention in stroke patients

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been used in patients with motor impairments as a rehabilitation tool, allowing the control of prosthetic devices with their brain signals. Typically, before each rehabilitation session a calibration phase is recorded to account for session-specific signal changes. Calibration is often an inconvenient process due to its length and patients' fatigue-proneness. This paper focuses on improving the performance of an EEG-based detector of walking intention for intersession transfer. Nine stroke subjects executed a self-paced walking task during three sessions, with one week between sessions. We performed an intersession adaptation by using 80% of one session's data and an additional 20% of a next session for training, and then we tested the detection model on the remaining part of the next session. In practice, this would constitute a longer initial calibration (40 minutes) and a shorter recalibration in subsequent sessions (10 minutes). After training set adaption we attain an average increase in performance of 13.5% over non-adaptive training. Furthermore, we used an approximation of Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence to quantify the difference between training and testing sets for the non-adaptive and adaptive transfer. As a potential explanation for the improvement of intersession performance, we found a significant decrease in KL-divergence in the case of adaptive transfer.

[1]  Dario Farina,et al.  Detection of movement-related cortical potentials based on subject-independent training , 2013, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[2]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  A Fast Fixed-Point Algorithm for Independent Component Analysis of Complex Valued Signals , 2000, Int. J. Neural Syst..

[3]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Omitting the intra-session calibration in EEG-based brain computer interface used for stroke rehabilitation , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[4]  Trevor J. Hastie,et al.  Sparse Discriminant Analysis , 2011, Technometrics.

[5]  Ning Jiang,et al.  An Accurate, Versatile, and Robust Brain Switch for Neurorehabilitation , 2014, Brain-Computer Interface Research.

[6]  Luis Montesano,et al.  Continuous decoding of intention to move from contralesional hemisphere brain oscillations in severely affected chronic stroke patients , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[7]  Shiliang Sun,et al.  A subject transfer framework for EEG classification , 2012, Neurocomputing.

[8]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  EEG Data Space Adaptation to Reduce Intersession Nonstationarity in Brain-Computer Interface , 2013, Neural Computation.

[9]  P. Vetter,et al.  Reliability and Stability of Contingent Negative Variation , 2000, Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback.

[10]  M. Molinari,et al.  Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: a review towards a top-down approach , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[11]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Learning from other subjects helps reducing Brain-Computer Interface calibration time , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.

[12]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Subject-independent mental state classification in single trials , 2009, Neural Networks.

[13]  D. Farina,et al.  A brain–computer interface for single-trial detection of gait initiation from movement related cortical potentials , 2015, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[14]  John R. Hershey,et al.  Approximating the Kullback Leibler Divergence Between Gaussian Mixture Models , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing - ICASSP '07.

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

[16]  Andreea Ioana Sburlea,et al.  Continuous detection of the self-initiated walking pre-movement state from EEG correlates without session-to-session recalibration , 2015, Journal of neural engineering.

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

[18]  Ricardo Chavarriaga,et al.  Latency correction of error potentials between different experiments reduces calibration time for single-trial classification , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[19]  R. Ward,et al.  EMG and EOG artifacts in brain computer interface systems: A survey , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[20]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[21]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Towards adaptive classification for BCI , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[22]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Towards Zero Training for Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2008, PloS one.