P300 Speller Performance Predictor Based on RSVP Multi-feature

Brain-computer interface (BCI) systems were developed so that people can control computers or machines through their brain activity without moving their limbs. The P300 speller is one of the BCI applications used most commonly, as is very simple and reliable and can achieve satisfactory performance. However, like other BCIs, the P300 speller still has room for improvements in terms of its practical use, for example, selecting the best compromise between spelling accuracy and information transfer rate (ITR; speed) so that the P300 speller can maintain high accuracy while increasing spelling speed. Therefore, seeking correlates of, and predicting, the P300 speller’s performance is necessary to understand and improve the technique. In this work, we investigated the correlations between rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task features and the P300 speller’s performance. Fifty-five subjects participated in the RSVP and conventional matrix P300 speller tasks and RSVP behavioral and electroencephalography (EEG) features were compared in the P300’s speller performance. We found that several of the RSVP’s event-related potential (ERP) and behavioral features were correlated with the P300 speller’s offline binary classification accuracy. Using these features, we propose a simple multi-feature performance predictor (r = 0.53, p = 0.0001) that outperforms any single feature performance predictor, including that of the conventional RSVP T1% predictor (r = 0.28, p = 0.06). This result demonstrates that selective multi-features can predict BCI performance better than a single feature alone.

[1]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[2]  Sebastian Halder,et al.  Psychological Predictors of Visual and Auditory P300 Brain-Computer Interface Performance , 2018, Front. Neurosci..

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

[4]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Prediction of Auditory and Visual P300 Brain-Computer Interface Aptitude , 2013, PloS one.

[5]  Fei Wang,et al.  Relationships between the resting-state network and the P3: Evidence from a scalp EEG study , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Tobias Kaufmann,et al.  Effects of resting heart rate variability on performance in the P300 brain-computer interface. , 2012, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[7]  A. Kübler,et al.  Brain Painting: First Evaluation of a New Brain–Computer Interface Application with ALS-Patients and Healthy Volunteers , 2010, Front. Neurosci..

[8]  J. Polich Updating P 300 : An Integrative Theory of P 3 a and P 3 b , 2009 .

[9]  A. Kübler,et al.  Effects of training and motivation on auditory P300 brain–computer interface performance , 2016, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[10]  M S Treder,et al.  Gaze-independent brain–computer interfaces based on covert attention and feature attention , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[11]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Neurophysiological predictor of SMR-based BCI performance , 2010, NeuroImage.

[12]  Alexander Maye,et al.  Temporal dynamics of access to consciousness in the attentional blink , 2007, NeuroImage.

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

[14]  Sung Chan Jun,et al.  High Theta and Low Alpha Powers May Be Indicative of BCI-Illiteracy in Motor Imagery , 2013, PloS one.

[15]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  AUTOMATIC ARTIFACT REJECTION FOR EEG DATA USING HIGH-ORDER STATISTICS AND INDEPENDENT COMPONENT ANALYSIS , 2001 .

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

[17]  Sven Hoffmann,et al.  The Correction of Eye Blink Artefacts in the EEG: A Comparison of Two Prominent Methods , 2008, PloS one.

[18]  A. Engel,et al.  Trial-by-Trial Coupling of Concurrent Electroencephalogram and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Identifies the Dynamics of Performance Monitoring , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[19]  S J Schiff,et al.  Performance predictors of brain–computer interfaces in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[20]  A. Engel,et al.  Neuronal Synchronization along the Dorsal Visual Pathway Reflects the Focus of Spatial Attention , 2008, Neuron.

[21]  Kimron Shapiro,et al.  Modulation of long-range neural synchrony reflects temporal limitations of visual attention in humans. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  P300 brain computer interface: current challenges and emerging trends , 2012, Front. Neuroeng..

[23]  Nand Sharma,et al.  Single-trial P300 Classification using PCA with LDA, QDA and Neural Networks , 2007, ArXiv.

[24]  Feng Wan,et al.  Alpha neurofeedback training improves SSVEP-based BCI performance , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[25]  Reinhold Scherer,et al.  Mind the Traps! Design Guidelines for Rigorous BCI Experiments , 2018 .

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

[27]  Kristine B Walhovd,et al.  One-year test-retest reliability of auditory ERPs in young and old adults. , 2002, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[28]  Mohamed Taher,et al.  Performance analysis of a Principal Component Analysis ensemble classifier for Emotiv headset P300 spellers , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[29]  Jonathan R Wolpaw,et al.  EEG correlates of P 300-based brain – computer interface ( BCI ) performance in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2012 .

[30]  Mel Slater,et al.  Brain Computer Interface for Virtual Reality Control , 2009, ESANN.

[31]  Salil H. Patel,et al.  Characterization of N200 and P300: Selected Studies of the Event-Related Potential , 2005, International journal of medical sciences.

[32]  Emanuel Donchin,et al.  The P300 component of the event-related brain potential as an index of information processing , 1982, Biological Psychology.

[33]  J. Wolpaw,et al.  EEG correlates of P300-based brain–computer interface (BCI) performance in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2012, Journal of neural engineering.

[34]  Hung-Chi Wu,et al.  Do resting brain dynamics predict oddball evoked-potential? , 2011, BMC Neuroscience.

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

[36]  F. Cincotti,et al.  Attention and P300-based BCI performance in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[37]  J. Polich Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[38]  W Karniski,et al.  Topographical and temporal stability of the P300. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[39]  B O Mainsah,et al.  Optimizing the stimulus presentation paradigm design for the P300-based brain-computer interface using performance prediction , 2017, Journal of neural engineering.

[40]  J. Polich,et al.  Cognitive and biological determinants of P300: an integrative review , 1995, Biological Psychology.

[41]  A. Kok On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[42]  Howard Bowman,et al.  The cost of space independence in P300-BCI spellers , 2013, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[43]  J. Enns,et al.  The attentional blink: Resource depletion or temporary loss of control? , 2005, Psychological research.

[44]  Andrea Kübler,et al.  Empathy, motivation, and P300 BCI performance , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

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

[46]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  The Influence of Psychological State and Motivation on Brain–Computer Interface Performance in Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis – a Longitudinal Study , 2010, Front. Neuropharma..

[47]  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.

[48]  Jongmin Lee,et al.  Seeking RSVP Task Features Correlated with P300 Speller Performance , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC).

[49]  Jonathan R Wolpaw,et al.  Independent home use of a brain-computer interface by people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2018, Neurology.

[50]  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.

[51]  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.