Online transcranial Doppler ultrasonographic control of an onscreen keyboard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain-computer interface (BCI) systems exploit brain activity for generating a control command and may be used by individuals with severe motor disabilities as an alternative means of communication. An emerging brain monitoring modality for BCI development is transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (TCD), which facilitates the tracking of cerebral blood flow velocities associated with mental tasks. However, TCD-BCI studies to date have exclusively been offline. The feasibility of a TCD-based BCI system hinges on its online performance. In this paper, an online TCD-BCI system was implemented, bilaterally tracking blood flow velocities in the middle cerebral arteries for system-paced control of a scanning keyboard. Target letters or words were selected by repetitively rehearsing the spelling while imagining the writing of the intended word, a left-lateralized task. Undesired letters or words were bypassed by performing visual tracking, a non-lateralized task. The keyboard scanning period was 15 s. With 10 able-bodied right-handed young adults, the two mental tasks were differentiated online using a Naïve Bayes classification algorithm and a set of time-domain, user-dependent features. The system achieved an average specificity and sensitivity of 81.44 ± 8.35 and 82.30 ± 7.39%, respectively. The level of agreement between the intended and machine-predicted selections was moderate (κ = 0.60). The average information transfer rate was 0.87 bits/min with an average throughput of 0.31 ± 0.12 character/min. These findings suggest that an online TCD-BCI can achieve reasonable accuracies with an intuitive language task, but with modest throughput. Future interface and signal classification enhancements are required to improve communication rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".