A brain-controlled switch for asynchronous control applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asynchronous control applications are an important class of application that has not received much attention from the brain-computer interface (BCI) community. This work provides a design for an asynchronous BCI switch and performs the first extensive evaluation of an asynchronous device in attentive, spontaneous electroencephalographic (EEG). The switch design [named the low-frequency asynchronous switch design (LF-ASD)] is based on a new feature set related to imaginary movements in the 1-4 Hz frequency range. This new feature set was identified from a unique analysis of EEG using a bi-scale wavelet. Offline evaluations of a prototype switch demonstrated hit (true positive) rates in the range of 38%-81% with corresponding false positive rates in the range of 0.3%-11.6%. The performance of the LF-ASD was contrasted with two other ASDs: one based on mu-power features and another based on the outlier processing method (OPM) algorithm. The minimum mean error rates for the LF-ASD were shown to be significantly lower than either of these other two switch designs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".