Towards user-centric BCI design: Markov chain-based user assessment for mental imagery EEG-BCIs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. While electroencephalography (EEG)-based brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) have many potential clinical applications, their use is impeded by poor performance for many users. To improve BCI performance, either via enhanced signal processing or user training, it is critical to understand and describe each user’s ability to perform mental control tasks and produce discernible EEG patterns. While classification accuracy has predominantly been used to assess user performance, limitations and criticisms of this approach have emerged, thus prompting the need to develop novel user assessment approaches with greater descriptive capability. Here, we propose a combination of unsupervised clustering and Markov chain models to assess and describe user skill. Approach. Using unsupervised K -means clustering, we segmented the EEG signal space into regions representing pattern states that users could produce. A user’s movement through these pattern states while performing different tasks was modeled using Markov chains. Finally, using the steady-state distributions and entropy rates of the Markov chains, we proposed two metrics taskDistinct and relativeTaskInconsistency to assess, respectively, a user’s ability to (i) produce distinct task-specific patterns for each mental task and (ii) maintain consistent patterns during individual tasks. Main results. Analysis of data from 14 adolescents using a three-class BCI revealed significant correlations between the taskDistinct and relativeTaskInconsistency metrics and classification F1 score. Moreover, analysis of the pattern states and Markov chain models yielded descriptive information regarding user performance not immediately apparent from classification accuracy. Significance. Our proposed user assessment method can be used in concert with classifier-based analysis to further understand the extent to which users produce task-specific, time-evolving EEG patterns. In turn, this information could be used to enhance user training or classifier design.
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".