MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946105889 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ab2373

Learning across multi-stimulus enhances target recognition methods in SSVEP-based BCIs

2019· article· en· W2946105889 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)Brain–computer interfaceComputer scienceSpeech recognitionElectroencephalographyPsychologyNeuroscienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Latest target recognition methods that are equipped with learning from the subject's calibration data, represented by the extended canonical correlation analysis (eCCA) and the ensemble task-related component analysis (eTRCA), can achieve extra high performance in the steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP)-based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), however their performance deteriorate drastically if the calibration trials are insufficient. This paper develops a new scheme to learn from limited calibration data. APPROACH: A learning across multiple stimuli scheme is proposed for the target recognition methods, which applies to learning the data corresponding to not only the target stimulus but also the other stimuli. The resulting optimization problems can be simplified and solved utilizing the prior knowledge and properties of SSVEPs across different stimuli. With the new learning scheme, the eCCA and the eTRCA can be extended to the multi-stimulus eCCA (ms-eCCA) and the multi-stimulus eTRCA (ms-eTRCA), respectively, as well as a combination of them (i.e. ms-eCCA+ms-eTRCA) that incorporates their merits. MAIN RESULTS: Evaluation and comparison using an SSVEP-BCI benchmark dataset with 35 subjects show that the ms-eCCA (or ms-eTRCA) performs significantly better than the eCCA (or eTRCA) method while the ms-eCCA+ms-eTRCA performs the best. With the learning across stimuli scheme, the existing target recognition methods can be further improved in terms of the target recognition performance and the ability against insufficient calibration. SIGNIFICANCE: A new learning scheme is proposed towards the efficient use of the calibration data, providing enhanced performance and saving calibration time in the SSVEP-based BCIs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.305 · 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