Mean shrinkage improves the classification of ERP signals by exploiting additional label information

Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is the most commonly used classification method for single trial data in a brain-computer interface (BCI) framework. The popularity of LDA arises from its robustness, simplicity and high accuracy. However, the standard LDA approach is not capable to exploit sublabel information (such as stimulus identity), which is accessible in data from event related potentials (ERPs): it assumes that the evoked potentials are independent of the stimulus identity and dependent only on the users' attentional state. We question this assumption and investigate several methods which extract subclass-specific features from ERP data. Moreover, we propose a novel classification approach which exploits subclass-specific features using mean shrinkage. Based on a reanalysis of two BCI data sets, we show that our novel approach outperforms the standard LDA approach, while being computationally highly efficient.

[1]  Benjamin Schrauwen,et al.  A Bayesian Model for Exploiting Application Constraints to Enable Unsupervised Training of a P300-based BCI , 2012, PloS one.

[2]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  The Berlin Brain–Computer Interface: Non-Medical Uses of BCI Technology , 2010, Front. Neurosci..

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

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

[5]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Generalizing Analytic Shrinkage for Arbitrary Covariance Structures , 2013, NIPS.

[6]  Jonathan R. Wolpaw,et al.  Brain–Computer InterfacesPrinciples and Practice , 2012 .

[7]  Michael Tangermann,et al.  Natural stimuli improve auditory BCIs with respect to ergonomics and performance. , 2012, Journal of neural engineering.

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

[9]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Introduction to machine learning for brain imaging , 2011, NeuroImage.

[10]  Olivier Ledoit,et al.  A well-conditioned estimator for large-dimensional covariance matrices , 2004 .

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

[12]  Shoji Makino,et al.  Classifying P300 responses to vowel stimuli for auditory brain-computer interface , 2013, 2013 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference.

[13]  K. Jellinger Toward Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2009 .

[14]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  Single-trial analysis and classification of ERP components — A tutorial , 2011, NeuroImage.

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

[16]  C. Stein,et al.  Estimation with Quadratic Loss , 1992 .