Development of a robust asynchronous brain-switch using ErrP-based error correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The ultimate goal of many brain-computer interface (BCI) research efforts is to provide individuals with severe motor impairments with a communication channel that they can control at will. To achieve this goal, an important system requirement is asynchronous control, whereby users can initiate intentional brain activation in a self-paced rather than system-cued manner. However, to date, asynchronous BCIs have been explored in a minority of BCI studies and their performance is generally below that of system-paced alternatives. In this paper, we present an asynchronous electroencephalography (EEG) BCI that detects a non-motor imagery cognitive task and investigated the possibility of improving its performance using error-related potentials (ErrP). APPROACH: Ten able-bodied adults attended two sessions of data collection each, one for training and one for testing the BCI. The visual interface consisted of a centrally located cartoon icon. For each participant, an asynchronous BCI differentiated among the idle state and a personally selected cognitive task (mental arithmetic, word generation or figure rotation). The BCI continuously analyzed the EEG data stream and displayed real-time feedback (i.e. icon fell over) upon detection of brain activity indicative of a cognitive task. The BCI also monitored the EEG signals for the presence of error-related potentials following the presentation of feedback. An ErrP classifier was invoked to automatically alter the task classifier outcome when an error-related potential was detected. MAIN RESULTS: The average post-error correction trial success rate across participants, 85% [Formula: see text] 12%, was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that pre-error correction (78% [Formula: see text] 11%). SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings support the addition of ErrP-correction to maximize the performance of asynchronous 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".