A General Framework for Characterizing Studies of Brain Interface Technology

The development of brain interface (BI) technology continues to attract researchers with a wide range of backgrounds and expertise. Though the BI community is committed to accurate and objective evaluation of methods, systems, and technology, the very diversity of the methods and terminology used in the field hinders understanding and impairs technology cross-fertilization and cross-group validation of findings. Underlying this dilemma is a lack of common perspective and language. As seen in our previous works in this area, our approach to remedy this problem is to propose language in the form of taxonomy and functional models. Our intent is to document and validate our best thinking in this area and publish a perspective that will stimulate discussion. We encourage others to do the same with the belief that focused discussion on language issues will accelerate the inherently slow natural evolution of language selection and thus alleviate related problems. In this work, we propose a theoretical framework for describing BI-technology-related studies. The proposed framework is based on the theoretical concepts and terminology from classical science, assistive technology development, human–computer interaction, and previous BI-related works. Using a representative set of studies from the literature, the proposed BI study framework was shown to be complete and appropriate perspective for thoroughly characterizing a BI study. We have also demonstrated that this BI study framework is useful for (1) objectively reviewing existing BI study designs and results, (2) comparing designs and results of multiple BI studies, (3) designing new studies or objectively reporting BI study results, and (4) facilitating intra- and inter-group communication and the education of new researchers. As such, it forms a sound and appropriate basis for community discussion.

[1]  William Z Rymer,et al.  Guest Editorial Brain–Computer Interface Technology: A Review of the Second International Meeting , 2001 .

[2]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  Research methods knowledge base , 2001 .

[3]  Karen A. F. Copeland Design and Analysis of Experiments, 5th Ed. , 2001 .

[4]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Conscious perception of brain states: mental strategies for brain–computer communication , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  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.

[6]  L.J. Trejo,et al.  Multimodal neuroelectric interface development , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[7]  R. J. Vetter,et al.  Silicon-substrate intracortical microelectrode arrays for long-term recording of neuronal spike activity in cerebral cortex , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[8]  Christa Neuper,et al.  An asynchronously controlled EEG-based virtual keyboard: improvement of the spelling rate , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2010 .

[10]  K.-R. Muller,et al.  Boosting bit rates and error detection for the classification of fast-paced motor commands based on single-trial EEG analysis , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[11]  P R Kennedy,et al.  Direct control of a computer from the human central nervous system. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[12]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Automatic processing of self-regulation of slow cortical potentials: evidence from brain-computer communication in paralysed patients , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[13]  Gernot R. Müller-Putz,et al.  "Virtual keyboard" controlled by spontaneous EEG activity , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[14]  W. A. Sarnacki,et al.  Brain–computer interface (BCI) operation: optimizing information transfer rates , 2003, Biological Psychology.

[15]  S. Makeig,et al.  EEG changes accompanying learned regulation of 12-Hz EEG activity , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[16]  Miguel A. L. Nicolelis,et al.  Brain–machine interfaces to restore motor function and probe neural circuits , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[17]  M. Stokes,et al.  Cognitive tasks for driving a brain-computer interfacing system: a pilot study , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[18]  C.W. Anderson,et al.  Comparison of linear, nonlinear, and feature selection methods for EEG signal classification , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[19]  M.M. Moore,et al.  Real-world applications for brain-computer interface technology , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[20]  G Pfurtscheller,et al.  EEG-based communication: improved accuracy by response verification. , 1998, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[21]  G. Birch,et al.  Initial on-line evaluations of the LF-ASD brain-computer interface with able-bodied and spinal-cord subjects using imagined voluntary motor potentials , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[22]  E. Brandt,et al.  Enabling America: Assessing the Role of Rehabilitation Science and Engineering , 1997 .

[23]  B.Z. Allison,et al.  ERPs evoked by different matrix sizes: implications for a brain computer interface (BCI) system , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[24]  S. G. Mason,et al.  Analyzing Trends in Brain Interface Technology: A Method to Compare Studies , 2005, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[25]  Karla Felix Navarro,et al.  A Comprehensive Survey of Brain Interface Technology Designs , 2007, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[26]  J.D. Bayliss,et al.  Use of the evoked potential P3 component for control in a virtual apartment , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[27]  Thierry Pun,et al.  BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE MODEL: UPPER-CAPACITY BOUND, SIGNAL- TO-NOISE RATIO ESTIMATION, AND OPTIMAL NUMBER OF SYMBOLS , 2004 .

[28]  Gary E. Birch,et al.  A brain-controlled switch for asynchronous control applications , 2000, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng..

[29]  F. Cincotti,et al.  The use of EEG modifications due to motor imagery for brain-computer interfaces , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[30]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[31]  A. Schlogl,et al.  Information transfer of an EEG-based brain computer interface , 2003, First International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 2003. Conference Proceedings..

[32]  B. Whitley Principles of research in behavioral science , 1996 .

[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]  Gary E. Birch,et al.  Designing pointing devices using brain-computer interface technology , 2003, First International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 2003. Conference Proceedings..

[35]  G.E. Birch,et al.  A general framework for brain-computer interface design , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[36]  Matthew Fellows,et al.  Robustness of neuroprosthetic decoding algorithms , 2003, Biological Cybernetics.

[37]  S P Levine,et al.  A direct brain interface based on event-related potentials. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[38]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  The Psychology of Menu Selection: Designing Cognitive Control at the Human/Computer Interface , 1991 .

[39]  Thomas W. King,et al.  Assistive Technology: Essential Human Factors , 1998 .

[40]  Thilo Hinterberger,et al.  Modulation of slow cortical potentials by transcranial magnetic stimulation in humans , 2002, Neuroscience Letters.

[41]  B R Baker,et al.  Using images to generate speech , 1986 .

[42]  D.M. Taylor,et al.  Information conveyed through brain-control: cursor versus robot , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[43]  Steven K. Feiner,et al.  Computer graphics: principles and practice (2nd ed.) , 1990 .

[44]  W. Shadish,et al.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference , 2001 .

[45]  Jerald D. Kralik,et al.  Real-time prediction of hand trajectory by ensembles of cortical neurons in primates , 2000, Nature.

[46]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[47]  Jukka Heikkonen,et al.  A local neural classifier for the recognition of EEG patterns associated to mental tasks , 2002, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[48]  E. Donchin,et al.  The mental prosthesis: Assessing the speed of a brain-computer interface , 1998 .

[49]  S. Piantadosi Clinical Trials : A Methodologic Perspective , 2005 .

[50]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication and Control. , 2011, Communications of the ACM.