MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1933895564 · doi:10.3109/17518423.2015.1087436

Challenges of implementing a personalized mental task near-infrared spectroscopy brain–computer interface for a non-verbal young adult with motor impairments

2015· article· en· W1933895564 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Weyand, Tom Chau

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Brain–computer interfaceInterface (matter)Functional near-infrared spectroscopyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAcquired brain injuryHuman–computer interactionRehabilitationComputer scienceCognitionCognitive psychologyMedicinePsychiatryNeuroscienceOperating systemPrefrontal cortexElectroencephalographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Near-infrared spectroscopy brain-computer interfaces (NIRS-BCIs) have been proposed as potential motor-free communication pathways. This paper documents the challenges of implementing an NIRS-BCI with a non-verbal, severely and congenitally impaired, but cognitively intact young adult. METHODS: A 5-session personalized mental task NIRS-BCI training paradigm was invoked, whereby participant-specific mental tasks were selected either by the researcher or by the user, on the basis of prior performance or user preference. RESULTS: Although the personalized mental task selection and training framework had been previously demonstrated with able-bodied participants, the participant was not able to exceed chance-level accuracies. Challenges to the acquisition of BCI control may have included disinclination to BCI training, structural or functional brain atypicalities, heightened emotional arousal and confounding haemodynamic patterns associated with novelty and reward processing. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we stress the necessity for further clinical NIRS-BCI research involving non-verbal individuals with severe motor impairments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207