Adaptive classification in a self-paced hybrid brain-computer interface system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the characteristics of EEG signals change over time, updating the classifier of a brain computer interface, BCI, (over time) would improve the performance of the system. Developing an adaptive classifier for a self-paced BCI however is not easy because the user's intention (and therefore the true labels of the EEG signals) are not known during the operation of the system. For certain applications, it may be possible to predict the labels of some of the EEG segments using some information about the user's state (e.g., the error potentials or gaze information). This study proposes a method that adaptively updates the classifier of a self-paced BCI in a supervised or semi-supervised manner, using those EEG segments whose labels can be predicted. We employ the eye position information obtained from an eye-tracker to predict the EEG labels. This eye-tracker is also used along with a self-paced BCI to form a hybrid BCI system. The results obtained from seven individuals show that the proposed algorithm outperforms the non-adaptive and other unsupervised adaptive classifiers. It achieves a true positive rate of 49.7% and lowers the number of false positives significantly to only 2.2 FPs/minute.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".