An auditory brain–computer interface evoked by natural speech

Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) are mainly intended for people unable to perform any muscular movement, such as patients in a complete locked-in state. The majority of BCIs interact visually with the user, either in the form of stimulation or biofeedback. However, visual BCIs challenge their ultimate use because they require the subjects to gaze, explore and shift eye-gaze using their muscles, thus excluding patients in a complete locked-in state or under the condition of the unresponsive wakefulness syndrome. In this study, we present a novel fully auditory EEG-BCI based on a dichotic listening paradigm using human voice for stimulation. This interface has been evaluated with healthy volunteers, achieving an average information transmission rate of 1.5 bits min⁻¹ in full-length trials and 2.7 bits min⁻¹ using the optimal length of trials, recorded with only one channel and without formal training. This novel technique opens the door to a more natural communication with users unable to use visual BCIs, with promising results in terms of performance, usability, training and cognitive effort.

[1]  Thilo Hinterberger,et al.  An Auditory Brain-Computer Interface Based on the Self-Regulation of Slow Cortical Potentials , 2005, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[2]  H. Davis,et al.  Enhancement of Evoked Cortical Potentials in Humans Related to a Task Requiring a Decision , 1964, Science.

[3]  E Donchin,et al.  Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[4]  A. Kübler,et al.  Motivation modulates the P300 amplitude during brain–computer interface use , 2010, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[5]  D. McFarland,et al.  An auditory brain–computer interface (BCI) , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[6]  Kim Dremstrup,et al.  Auditory and spatial navigation imagery in Brain–Computer Interface using optimized wavelets , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

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

[8]  M. A. Lopez-Gordo,et al.  Customized stimulation enhances performance of independent binary SSVEP-BCIs , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[9]  Alberto Prieto,et al.  Use of Phase in Brain–Computer Interfaces based on Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials , 2010, Neural Processing Letters.

[10]  R. J. Roberts,et al.  Dichotic listening: expanded norms and clinical application. , 2002, Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists.

[11]  Clemens Brunner,et al.  Analysis of sensorimotor rhythms for the implementation of a brain switch for healthy subjects , 2010, Biomed. Signal Process. Control..

[12]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Machine learning for real-time single-trial EEG-analysis: From brain–computer interfacing to mental state monitoring , 2008, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[13]  Kouji Takano,et al.  My thoughts through a robot's eyes: An augmented reality-brain–machine interface , 2010, Neuroscience Research.

[14]  Antoine J. Shahin,et al.  Brain oscillations during semantic evaluation of speech , 2009, Brain and Cognition.

[15]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Detecting Awareness in the Vegetative State , 2006, Science.

[16]  Gernot R. Müller-Putz,et al.  Control of an Electrical Prosthesis With an SSVEP-Based BCI , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[17]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Brain-computer communication: self-regulation of slow cortical potentials for verbal communication. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Do vegetative patients retain aspects of language comprehension? Evidence from fMRI. , 2007, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[19]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Selective attention and evoked potentials inhumans — A critical review , 1975, Biological Psychology.

[20]  Steven Laureys,et al.  When thoughts become action: An fMRI paradigm to study volitional brain activity in non-communicative brain injured patients , 2007, NeuroImage.

[21]  Edward J. Golob,et al.  Neural activity before and after conscious perception in dichotic listening , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

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

[23]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  Towards an independent brain–computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[24]  Po-Lei Lee,et al.  Dual-frequency steady-state visual evoked potential for brain computer interface , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[25]  Walter G Sannita,et al.  Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome: a new name for the vegetative state or apallic syndrome , 2010, BMC medicine.

[26]  Steven Laureys,et al.  Self-consciousness in non-communicative patients , 2007, Consciousness and Cognition.

[27]  S. Theodoridis,et al.  Classifiers Based on Bayes Decision Theory , 2010 .

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

[29]  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.

[30]  Andrea Kübler,et al.  CHAPTER 17 – Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication in Paralysed Patients and Implications for Disorders of Consciousness , 2009 .

[31]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  A brain–computer interface tool to assess cognitive functions in completely paralyzed patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[32]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: Extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients? , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[33]  Xiaorong Gao,et al.  A BCI-based environmental controller for the motion-disabled. , 2003, IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[34]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Detecting awareness in the vegetative state. , 2006, Science.

[35]  A. Cichocki,et al.  Optimization of SSVEP brain responses with application to eight-command Brain–Computer Interface , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[36]  Steven Laureys,et al.  A new era of coma and consciousness science. , 2009, Progress in brain research.

[37]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  An auditory oddball (P300) spelling system for brain-computer interfaces. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[38]  Yoshiro Okubo,et al.  Cerebral activation associated with speech sound discrimination during the diotic listening task: An fMRI study , 2010, Neuroscience Research.

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

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

[41]  B. Allison,et al.  BCI Demographics: How Many (and What Kinds of) People Can Use an SSVEP BCI? , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[42]  E. C. Cherry.  Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears , 1953 .

[43]  Masato Fukuda,et al.  Brain electric activity for active inhibition of auditory irrelevant information , 2005, Neuroscience Letters.

[44]  Ricardo Ron-Angevin,et al.  Brain–computer interface: Changes in performance using virtual reality techniques , 2009, Neuroscience Letters.

[45]  F. Cincotti,et al.  Eye-gaze independent EEG-based brain–computer interfaces for communication , 2012, Journal of neural engineering.

[46]  Yijun Wang,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces Based on Visual Evoked Potentials , 2008, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[47]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Electrical Signs of Selective Attention in the Human Brain , 1973, Science.

[48]  K. Kansaku,et al.  Operation of a P300-based brain–computer interface by individuals with cervical spinal cord injury , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.