Customized stimulation enhances performance of independent binary SSVEP-BCIs

OBJECTIVE Brain-computer interfaces based on steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP-BCIs) achieve the highest performance, due to their multiclass nature, in paradigms in which different visual stimuli are shown. Studies of independent binary SSVEP-BCIs have been previously presented in which it was not necessary to gaze at the stimuli at the cost of performance. Despite that, the energy of the SSVEPs is largely affected by the temporal and spatial frequencies of the stimulus, there are no studies in the BCI literature about its combined impact on the final performance of SSVEP-BCIs. The objective of this study is to present an experiment that evaluates the best configuration of the visual stimulus for each subject, thus minimizing the decline in performance of independent binary SSVEP-BCIs. METHODS The participants attended and ignored a single structured stimulus configured with a combination of spatial and temporal frequencies at a time. They were instructed to gaze at a central point during the whole experiment. The best combination of spatial and temporal frequencies achieved for each subject, in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), was subsequently determined. RESULTS The SNR showed a significant dependency on the combination of frequencies, in such a way that only a reduced set of these combinations was applicable for obtaining an optimum SNR. The selection of an inappropriate stimulus configuration may cause a degradation of the information transmission rate (ITR) as it does the SNR. CONCLUSIONS The appropriate selection of the optimal spatial and temporal frequencies determines the performance of independent binary SSVEP-BCIs. This fact is critical to enhance its low performance; hence, they should be adjusted independently for each subject. SIGNIFICANCE Independent binary SSVEP-BCIs can be used in patients who are unable to control their gaze sufficiently. The correct selection of the spatial and temporal frequencies has a considerable benefit on their low ITR that must be taken into account. In order to find the most suitable frequencies, a test similar to the presented in this study should be performed beforehand for each SSVEP-BCI user. This regard is not documented in studies conducted in the BCI literature.

[1]  J. Odom.  VISUAL EVOKED POTENTIALS STANDARD , 2004 .

[2]  José del R. Millán,et al.  An Introduction to Brain-Computer Interfacing , 2007 .

[3]  J. Masdeu,et al.  Human Cerebral Activation during Steady-State Visual-Evoked Responses , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Effects of spatial selective attention on the steady-state visual evoked potential in the 20-28 Hz range. , 1998, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[5]  J. Jagielski,et al.  [Origin of the visual evoked potentials in the light of the conducted research]. , 1995, Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska.

[6]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Selective attention to stimulus location modulates the steady-state visual evoked potential. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Wei Wu,et al.  Frequency recognition based on canonical correlation analysis for SSVEP-based BCIs , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

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

[9]  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.

[10]  H Spekreijse,et al.  Contrast evoked responses in man. , 1973, Vision research.

[11]  D. Regan.  Human brain electrophysiology: Evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine , 1989 .

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

[13]  Yu-Te Wu,et al.  Brain computer interface using flash onset and offset visual evoked potentials , 2008, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[14]  Marcus A. Bearse,et al.  Principles and Practice of Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision, 2nd ed. , 2007 .

[15]  E. Altenmüller,et al.  Visuell evozierte Potentiale (VEP) und Elektroretinogramm (ERG) , 1996 .

[16]  Erich E. Sutter,et al.  The brain response interface: communication through visually-induced electrical brain responses , 1992 .

[17]  J.J. Vidal,et al.  Real-time detection of brain events in EEG , 1977, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[18]  R.M. Gray,et al.  Communication systems: An introduction to signals and noise in electrical communication , 1976, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[19]  Miguel Ángel López Gordo.  Interfaz bci de altas prestaciones basada en la deteccion y procesamiento de la actividad cerebral (bci-depracap) , 2009 .

[20]  Xiaorong Gao,et al.  Design and implementation of a brain-computer interface with high transfer rates , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  Vaegan,et al.  Visual evoked potentials standard (2004) , 2004, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[22]  Stuart L. Graham,et al.  Effect of stimulus check size on multifocal visual evoked potentials , 2003, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

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

[24]  S. A. Hillyard,et al.  Sustained division of the attentional spotlight , 2003, Nature.

[25]  Shozo Tobimatsu,et al.  Effect of spatial frequency on transient and steady-state VEPs: stimulation with checkerboard, square-wave grating and sinusoidal grating patterns , 1993, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[26]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Concurrent recording of steady-state and transient event-related potentials as indices of visual-spatial selective attention , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[27]  G G Celesia,et al.  Effect of spatial frequency on simultaneous recorded steady-state pattern electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[28]  Michael Bach,et al.  Guidelines for calibration of stimulus and recording parameters used in clinical electrophysiology of vision , 2003, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[29]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  Impact of Frequency Selection on LCD Screens for SSVEP Based Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2009, IWANN.

[30]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Combining steady‐state visual evoked potentials and f MRI to localize brain activity during selective attention , 1997, Human brain mapping.

[31]  Simon P. Kelly,et al.  Visual spatial attention control in an independent brain-computer interface , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[32]  Michael Bach,et al.  Principles and practice of clinical electrophysiology of vision , 1991 .