@article {2541, title = {Review of the BCI Competition IV.}, journal = {Frontiers in Neuroprosthetics}, volume = {6}, year = {2012}, month = {07/2012}, pages = {1-31}, abstract = {The BCI competition IV stands in the tradition of prior BCI competitions that aim to provide high quality neuroscientific data for open access to the scientific community. As experienced already in prior competitions not only scientists from the narrow field of BCI compete, but scholars with a broad variety of backgrounds and nationalities. They include high specialists as well as students. The goals of all BCI competitions have always been to challenge with respect to novel paradigms and complex data. We report on the following challenges: (1) asynchronous data, (2) synthetic, (3) multi-class continuous data, (4) session-to-session transfer, (5) directionally modulated MEG, (6) finger movements recorded by ECoG. As after past competitions, our hope is that winning entries may enhance the analysis methods of future BCIs.}, keywords = {BCI, brain-computer interface, competition}, doi = {10.3389/fnins.2012.00055}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22811657}, author = {Tangermann, M. and Muller, K.R. and Aertsen, A. and Niels Birbaumer and Christoph Braun and Brunner, Clemens and Leeb, R. and Mehring, C. and Miller, K.J. and Mueller-Putz, G. and Nolte, G. and Pfurtscheller, G. and Preissl, H. and Gerwin Schalk and Schl{\"o}gl, A. and Vidaurre, C. and Waldert, S. and Benjamin Blankertz} } @article {2131, title = {Transition from the locked in to the completely locked-in state: a physiological analysis.}, journal = {Clin Neurophysiol}, volume = {122}, year = {2011}, month = {06/2011}, pages = {925-33}, abstract = {

OBJECTIVE:\ 

To clarify the physiological and behavioral boundaries between locked-in (LIS) and the completely locked-in state (CLIS) (no voluntary eye movements, no communication possible) through electrophysiological data and to secure\ brain-computer-interface\ (BCI) communication.

METHODS:\ 

Electromyography from facial muscles, external anal sphincter (EAS), electrooculography and electrocorticographic data during different psychophysiological tests were acquired to define electrophysiological differences in an amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patient with an intracranially implanted grid of 112 electrodes for nine months while the patient passed from the LIS to the CLIS.

RESULTS:\ 

At the very end of the LIS there was no facial muscle activity, nor external anal sphincter but eye control. Eye movements were slow and lasted for short periods only. During CLIS event related\ brainpotentials (ERP) to passive limb movements and auditory stimuli were recorded, vibrotactile stimulation of different body parts resulted in no ERP response.

CONCLUSIONS:\ 

The results presented contradict the commonly accepted assumption that the EAS is the last remaining muscle under voluntary control and demonstrate complete loss of eye movements in CLIS. The eye muscle was shown to be the last muscle group under voluntary control. The findings suggest ALS as a multisystem disorder, even affecting afferent sensory pathways.

SIGNIFICANCE:\ 

Auditory and proprioceptive\ brain-computer-interface\ (BCI) systems are the only remaining communication channels in CLIS.

}, keywords = {Adult, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Area Under Curve, Brain, Communication Aids for Disabled, Disease Progression, Electroencephalography, Electromyography, Humans, Male, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1872-8952}, doi = {10.1016/j.clinph.2010.08.019}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20888292}, author = {Murguialday, A Ramos and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Bensch, M and Martens, S M M and S Halder and Nijboer, F and Schoelkopf, Bernhard and Niels Birbaumer and Gharabaghi, A} } @article {3132, title = {An auditory brain-computer interface (BCI).}, journal = {Journal of neuroscience methods}, volume = {167}, year = {2008}, month = {01/2008}, pages = {43{\textendash}50}, abstract = {Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) translate brain activity into signals controlling external devices. BCIs based on visual stimuli can maintain communication in severely paralyzed patients, but only if intact vision is available. Debilitating neurological disorders however, may lead to loss of intact vision. The current study explores the feasibility of an auditory BCI. Sixteen healthy volunteers participated in three training sessions consisting of 30 2-3 min runs in which they learned to increase or decrease the amplitude of sensorimotor rhythms (SMR) of the EEG. Half of the participants were presented with visual and half with auditory feedback. Mood and motivation were assessed prior to each session. Although BCI performance in the visual feedback group was superior to the auditory feedback group there was no difference in performance at the end of the third session. Participants in the auditory feedback group learned slower, but four out of eight reached an accuracy of over 70\% correct in the last session comparable to the visual feedback group. Decreasing performance of some participants in the visual feedback group is related to mood and motivation. We conclude that with sufficient training time an auditory BCI may be as efficient as a visual BCI. Mood and motivation play a role in learning to use a BCI.}, keywords = {auditory feedback, brain-computer interface, EEG, locked-in state, motivation, sensorimotor rhythm}, issn = {0165-0270}, doi = {10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.02.009}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17399797}, author = {Nijboer, Femke and Adrian Furdea and Gunst, Ingo and Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Dennis J. McFarland and Niels Birbaumer and K{\"u}bler, Andrea} } @article {3199, title = {A P300-based brain-computer interface for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.}, journal = {Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology}, volume = {119}, year = {2008}, month = {08/2008}, pages = {1909{\textendash}1916}, abstract = {OBJECTIVE: The current study evaluates the efficacy of a P300-based brain-computer interface (BCI) communication device for individuals with advanced ALS. METHODS: Participants attended to one cell of a N x N matrix while the N rows and N columns flashed randomly. Each cell of the matrix contained one character. Every flash of an attended character served as a rare event in an oddball sequence and elicited a P300 response. Classification coefficients derived using a stepwise linear discriminant function were applied to the data after each set of flashes. The character receiving the highest discriminant score was presented as feedback. RESULTS: In Phase I, six participants used a 6 x 6 matrix on 12 separate days with a mean rate of 1.2 selections/min and mean online and offline accuracies of 62\% and 82\%, respectively. In Phase II, four participants used either a 6 x 6 or a 7 x 7 matrix to produce novel and spontaneous statements with a mean online rate of 2.1 selections/min and online accuracy of 79\%. The amplitude and latency of the P300 remained stable over 40 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Participants could communicate with the P300-based BCI and performance was stable over many months. SIGNIFICANCE: BCIs could provide an alternative communication and control technology in the daily lives of people severely disabled by ALS.}, keywords = {Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, brain-computer interface, electroencephalogram, event-related potentials, P300, Rehabilitation}, issn = {1388-2457}, doi = {10.1016/j.clinph.2008.03.034}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18571984}, author = {Nijboer, F. and Sellers, E. W. and Mellinger, J. and Jordan, M. A. and Matuz, T. and Adrian Furdea and S Halder and Mochty, U. and Krusienski, D. J. and Theresa M Vaughan and Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and K{\"u}bler, A.} } @article {2137, title = {Voluntary brain regulation and communication with electrocorticogram signals.}, journal = {Epilepsy Behav}, volume = {13}, year = {2008}, month = {08/2008}, pages = {300-6}, abstract = {

Brain-computer interfaces\ (BCIs) can be used for communication in writing without muscular activity or for learning to control seizures by voluntary regulation of\ brain\ signals such as the electroencephalogram (EEG). Three of five patients with epilepsy were able to spell their names with electrocorticogram (ECoG) signals derived from motor-related areas within only one or two training sessions. Imagery of finger or tongue movements was classified with support-vector classification of autoregressive coefficients derived from the ECoG signals. After training of the classifier, binary classification responses were used to select letters from a\ computer-generated menu. Offline analysis showed increased theta activity in the unsuccessful patients, whereas the successful patients exhibited dominant sensorimotor rhythms that they could control. The high spatial resolution and increased signal-to-noise ratio in ECoG signals, combined with short training periods, may offer an alternative for communication in complete paralysis, locked-in syndrome, and motor restoration.

}, keywords = {Adult, Biofeedback, Psychology, Cerebral Cortex, Communication Aids for Disabled, Dominance, Cerebral, Electroencephalography, Epilepsies, Partial, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Motor Cortex, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Software, Somatosensory Cortex, Theta Rhythm, User-Computer Interface, Writing}, issn = {1525-5069}, doi = {10.1016/j.yebeh.2008.03.014}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18495541}, author = {Hinterberger, T. and Widman, Guido and Lal, T.N and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Tangermann, Michael and Rosenstiel, W. and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B and Elger, Christian and Niels Birbaumer} } @inbook {2139, title = {Brain Computer Interfaces for Communication in Paralysis: a Clinical-Experimental Approach.}, year = {2007}, publisher = {Virtual Library of Psychology at Saarland University and State Library, GERMANY, PsyDok [http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/phpoai/oai2.php] (Germany)}, organization = {Virtual Library of Psychology at Saarland University and State Library, GERMANY, PsyDok [http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/phpoai/oai2.php] (Germany)}, abstract = {

An overview of different approaches to brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) developed in our laboratory is given. An important clinical application of BCIs is to enable communication or environmental control in severely paralyzed patients. The BCI {\textquotedblleft}Thought-Translation Device (TTD){\textquotedblright} allows verbal communication through the voluntary self-regulation of brain signals (e.g., slow cortical potentials (SCPs)), which is achieved by operant feedback training. Humans{\textquoteright} ability to self-regulate their SCPs is used to move a cursor toward a target that contains a selectable letter set. Two different approaches were followed to developWeb browsers that could be controlled with binary brain responses. Implementing more powerful classification methods including different signal parameters such as oscillatory features improved our BCI considerably. It was also tested on signals with implanted electrodes. Most BCIs provide the user with a visual feedback interface. Visually impaired patients require an auditory feedback mode. A procedure using auditory (sonified) feedback of multiple EEG parameters was evaluated. Properties of the auditory systems are reported and the results of two experiments with auditory feedback are presented. Clinical data of eight ALS patients demonstrated that all patients were able to acquire efficient brain control of one of the three available BCI systems (SCP, {\textmu}-rhythm, and P300), most of them used the SCP-BCI. A controlled comparison of the three systems in a group of ALS patients, however, showed that P300-BCI and the {\textmu}-BCI are faster and more easily acquired than SCP-BCI, at least in patients with some rudimentary motor control left. Six patients who started BCI training after entering the completely locked-in state did not achieve reliable communication skills with any BCI system. One completely locked-in patient was able t o communicate shortly with a ph-meter, but lost control afterward.

}, keywords = {brain-computer interfaces, EEG, experiment, Medical sciences Medicine, paralyzed patients, slow cortical potentials, Thought-Translation Device}, isbn = {9780262256049}, url = {http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/volltexte/2008/2154/}, author = {Hinterberger, T. and Nijboer, F and K{\"u}bler, A. and Matuz, T. and Adrian Furdea and Mochty, Ursula and Jordan, M. and Lal, T.N and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Bensch, M and Tangermann, Michael and Widmann, G. and Elger, Christian and Rosenstiel, W. and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2181, title = {An MEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI).}, journal = {Neuroimage}, volume = {36}, year = {2007}, month = {07/2007}, pages = {581-93}, abstract = {

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) allow for communicating intentions by mere brain activity, not involving muscles. Thus, BCIs may offer patients who have lost all voluntary muscle control the only possible way to communicate. Many recent studies have demonstrated that BCIs based on\ electroencephalography(EEG) can allow healthy and severely paralyzed individuals to communicate. While this approach is safe and inexpensive, communication is slow. Magnetoencephalography (MEG) provides signals with higher spatiotemporal resolution than\ EEG\ and could thus be used to explore whether these improved signal properties translate into increased BCI communication speed. In this study, we investigated the utility of an MEG-based BCI that uses voluntary amplitude modulation of sensorimotor mu and beta rhythms. To increase the signal-to-noise ratio, we present a simple spatial filtering method that takes the geometric properties of signal propagation in MEG into account, and we present methods that can process artifacts specifically encountered in an MEG-based BCI. Exemplarily, six participants were successfully trained to communicate binary decisions by imagery of limb movements using a feedback paradigm. Participants achieved significant mu rhythm self control within 32 min of feedback training. For a subgroup of three participants, we localized the origin of the amplitude modulated signal to the motor cortex. Our results suggest that an MEG-based BCI is feasible and efficient in terms of user training.

}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Artifacts, Brain, Electroencephalography, Electromagnetic Fields, Electromyography, Feedback, Female, Foot, Hand, Head Movements, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Magnetoencephalography, Male, Movement, Principal Component Analysis, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1053-8119}, doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.03.019}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17475511}, author = {Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Gerwin Schalk and Christoph Braun and Preissl, Hubert and Rosenstiel, W. and Niels Birbaumer and K{\"u}bler, A.} } @article {2172, title = {The BCI competition III: Validating alternative approaches to actual BCI problems.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {153-9}, abstract = {

A\ brain-computer interface\ (BCI) is a system that allows its users to control external devices with\ brainactivity. Although the proof-of-concept was given decades ago, the reliable translation of user intent into device control commands is still a major challenge. Success requires the effective interaction of two adaptive controllers: the user{\textquoteright}s\ brain, which produces\ brain\ activity that encodes intent, and the BCI system, which translates that activity into device control commands. In order to facilitate this interaction, many laboratories are exploring a variety of signal analysis techniques to improve the adaptation of the BCI system to the user. In the literature, many machine learning and pattern classification algorithms have been reported to give impressive results when applied to BCI data in offline analyses. However, it is more difficult to evaluate their relative value for actual\ online\ use. BCI data competitions have been organized to provide objective formal evaluations of alternative methods. Prompted by the great interest in the first two BCI Competitions, we organized the third BCI Competition to address several of the most difficult and important analysis problems in BCI research. The paper describes the data sets that were provided to the competitors and gives an overview of the results.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Brain, Communication Aids for Disabled, Databases, Factual, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Neuromuscular Diseases, Software Validation, Technology Assessment, Biomedical, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875642}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792282}, author = {Benjamin Blankertz and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Krusienski, Dean J and Gerwin Schalk and Jonathan Wolpaw and Schl{\"o}gl, Alois and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Mill{\'a}n, Jos{\'e} del R and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2143, title = {Classifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fast BCI implementation: comparison of nonparalyzed and completely paralyzed subjects.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {183-6}, abstract = {

We summarize results from a series of related studies that aim to develop a motor-imagery-basedbrain-computer interface\ using a single recording session of electroencephalogram (EEG) or electrocorticogram (ECoG) signals for each subject. We apply the same experimental and analytical methods to 11 nonparalysed subjects (eight EEG, three ECoG), and to five paralyzed subjects (four EEG, one ECoG) who had been unable to communicate for some time. While it was relatively easy to obtain classifiable signals quickly from most of the nonparalyzed subjects, it proved impossible to classify the signals obtained from the paralyzed patients by the same methods. This highlights the fact that though certain BCI paradigms may work well with healthy subjects, this does not necessarily indicate success with the target user group. We outline possible reasons for this failure to transfer.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Cluster Analysis, Computer User Training, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Middle Aged, Paralysis, Pattern Recognition, Automated, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875548}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792289}, author = {Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Lal, T.N and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Hinterberger, T. and Wilhelm, Barbara and Nijboer, F and Mochty, Ursula and Widman, Guido and Elger, Christian and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B and K{\"u}bler, A. and Niels Birbaumer} } @inbook {2138, title = {Classifying Event-Related Desynchronization in EEG, ECoG and MEG Signals.}, booktitle = {Pattern Recognition}, series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, volume = {4174}, year = {2006}, pages = {404-413}, publisher = {Springer Berlin / Heidelberg}, organization = {Springer Berlin / Heidelberg}, abstract = {

We employed three different brain signal recording methods to perform Brain-Computer Interface studies on untrained subjects. In all cases, we aim to develop a system that could be used for fast, reliable preliminary screening in clinical BCI application, and we are interested in knowing how long screening sessions need to be. Good performance could be achieved, on average, after the first 200 trials in EEG, 75{\textendash}100 trials in MEG, or 25{\textendash}50 trials in ECoG. We compare the performance of Independent Component Analysis and the Common Spatial Pattern algorithm in each of the three sensor types, finding that spatial filtering does not help in MEG, helps a little in ECoG, and improves performance a great deal in EEG. In all cases the unsupervised ICA algorithm performed at least as well as the supervised CSP algorithm, which can suffer from poor generalization performance due to overfitting, particularly in ECoG and MEG.

}, isbn = {978-3-540-44412-1}, doi = {10.1007/11861898_41}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11861898_41}, author = {Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Lal, T.N and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Hinterberger, T. and Widman, Guido and Elger, Christian and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B and Niels Birbaumer}, editor = {Franke, Katrin and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Nickolay, Bertram and Sch{\"a}fer, Ralf} } @article {2148, title = {A Brain Computer Interface with Online Feedback based on Magnetoencephalography.}, year = {2005}, month = {08/2005}, abstract = {

The aim of this paper is to show that machine learning techniques can be used to derive a classifying function for human brain signal data measured by magnetoencephalography (MEG), for the use in a brain computer interface (BCI). This is especially helpful for evaluating quickly whether a BCI approach based on electroencephalography, on which training may be slower due to lower signalto-noise ratio, is likely to succeed. We apply RCE and regularized SVMs to the experimental data of ten healthy subjects performing a motor imagery task. Four subjects were able to use a trained classifier to write a short name. Further analysis gives evidence that the proposed imagination task is suboptimal for the possible extension to a multiclass interface. To the best of our knowledge this paper is the first working online MEG-based BCI and is therefore a {\textquotedblleft}proof of concept{\textquotedblright}.

}, keywords = {Brain Computer Interfaces, User Modelling for Computer Human Interaction}, doi = {10.1145/1102351.1102410}, url = {http://www.researchgate.net/publication/221346004_A_brain_computer_interface_with_online_feedback_based_on_magnetoencephalography}, author = {Lal, T.N and Schroeder, Michael and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Preissl, Hubert and Hinterberger, T. and Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Bogdan, Martin and Rosenstiel, W. and Niels Birbaumer and Schoelkopf, Bernhard} } @article {2147, title = {Methods Towards Invasive Human Brain Computer Interfaces.}, year = {2005}, month = {2005}, abstract = {

During the last ten years there has been growing interest in the develop- ment of Brain Computer Interfaces (BCIs). The field has mainly been driven by the needs of completely paralyzed patients to communicate. With a few exceptions, most human BCIs are based on extracranial elec- troencephalography (EEG). However, reported bit rates are still low. One reason for this is the low signal-to-noise ratio of the EEG [16]. We are currently investigating if BCIs based on electrocorticography (ECoG) are a viable alternative. In this paper we present the method and examples of intracranial EEG recordings of three epilepsy patients with electrode grids placed on the motor cortex. The patients were asked to repeat- edly imagine movements of two kinds, e.g., tongue or finger movements. We analyze the classifiability of the data using Support Vector Machines (SVMs) [18, 21] and Recursive Channel Elimination (RCE) [11].\ 

}, keywords = {Brain Computer Interfaces}, isbn = {0-262-19534-8}, doi = {10.1.1.64.8486}, url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.64.8486}, author = {Lal, T.N and Hinterberger, T. and Widman, Guido and Schroeder, Michael and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Rosenstiel, W. and Elger, Christian and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {3220, title = {Patients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brain-computer interface.}, journal = {Neurology}, volume = {64}, year = {2005}, month = {05/2005}, pages = {1775{\textendash}1777}, abstract = {People with severe motor disabilities can maintain an acceptable quality of life if they can communicate. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), which do not depend on muscle control, can provide communication. Four people severely disabled by ALS learned to operate a BCI with EEG rhythms recorded over sensorimotor cortex. These results suggest that a sensorimotor rhythm-based BCI could help maintain quality of life for people with ALS.}, keywords = {User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1526-632X}, doi = {10.1212/01.WNL.0000158616.43002.6D}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15911809}, author = {K{\"u}bler, A. and Nijboer, F. and Mellinger, J. and Theresa M Vaughan and Pawelzik, H. and Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Niels Birbaumer and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2169, title = {Patients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brain-computer interface.}, journal = {Neurology}, volume = {64}, year = {2005}, month = {05/2005}, pages = {1775-7}, abstract = {

People with severe motor disabilities can maintain an acceptable quality of life if they can communicate.\ Brain-computer interfaces\ (BCIs), which do not depend on muscle control, can provide communication. Four people severely disabled by ALS learned to operate a BCI with EEG rhythms recorded over sensorimotor cortex. These results suggest that a sensorimotor rhythm-based\ BCI could help maintain quality of life for people with ALS.

}, keywords = {Aged, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Movement, Paralysis, Photic Stimulation, Prostheses and Implants, Somatosensory Cortex, Treatment Outcome, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1526-632X}, doi = {10.1212/01.WNL.0000158616.43002.6D}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15911809}, author = {K{\"u}bler, A. and Nijboer, F and Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Theresa M Vaughan and Pawelzik, H and Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Niels Birbaumer and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2144, title = {Robust EEG Channel Selection across Subjects for Brain-Computer Interfaces.}, journal = {EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing}, volume = {2005}, year = {2005}, month = {01/2005}, pages = {3103{\textendash}3112}, abstract = {

Most EEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI) paradigms come along with specific electrode positions, for example, for a visual-based BCI, electrode positions close to the primary visual cortex are used. For new BCI paradigms it is usually not known where task relevant activity can be measured from the scalp. For individual subjects, Lal et al. in 2004 showed that recording positions can be found without the use of prior knowledge about the paradigm used. However it remains unclear to what extent their method of recursive channel elimination (RCE) can be generalized across subjects. In this paper we transfer channel rankings from a group of subjects to a new subject. For motor imagery tasks the results are promising, although cross-subject channel selection does not quite achieve the performance of channel selection on data of single subjects. Although the RCE method was not provided with prior knowledge about the mental task, channels that are well known to be important (from a physiological point of view) were consistently selected whereas task-irrelevant channels were reliably disregarded.

}, keywords = {brain-computer interface, channel selection, Electroencephalography, feature selection, recursive channel elimination, support vector machine}, doi = {10.1155/ASP.2005.3103}, url = {http://www.researchgate.net/publication/26532072_Robust_EEG_Channel_Selection_across_Subjects_for_Brain-Computer_Interfaces}, author = {Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Lal, T.N and Hinterberger, T. and Bogdan, Martin and Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Niels Birbaumer and Rosenstiel, W. and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B}, editor = {Vesin J M, T EbrahimiEditor} } @article {2145, title = {An Auditory Paradigm for Brain{\textendash}Computer Interfaces.}, year = {2004}, month = {2004}, abstract = {

Motivated by the particular problems involved in communicating with {\textquotedblleft}locked-in{\textquotedblright} paralysed patients, we aim to develop a brain- computer interface that uses auditory stimuli. We describe a paradigm that allows a user to make a binary decision by focusing attention on one of two concurrent auditory stimulus sequences. Using Support Vector Machine classification and Recursive Chan- nel Elimination on the independent components of averaged event- related potentials, we show that an untrained user{\textquoteright}s EEG data can be classified with an encouragingly high level of accuracy. This suggests that it is possible for users to modulate EEG signals in a single trial by the conscious direction of attention, well enough to be useful in BCI.\ 

}, keywords = {Brain Computer Interfaces}, url = {http://papers.nips.cc/paper/2551-an-auditory-paradigm-for-brain-computer-interfaces}, author = {Jeremy Jeremy Hill and Lal, T.N and Bierig, K. and Niels Birbaumer and Sch{\"o}lkopf, B} } @article {3222, title = {The BCI Competition 2003: progress and perspectives in detection and discrimination of EEG single trials.}, journal = {IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1044{\textendash}1051}, abstract = {Interest in developing a new method of man-to-machine communication{\textendash}a brain-computer interface (BCI){\textendash}has grown steadily over the past few decades. BCIs create a new communication channel between the brain and an output device by bypassing conventional motor output pathways of nerves and muscles. These systems use signals recorded from the scalp, the surface of the cortex, or from inside the brain to enable users to control a variety of applications including simple word-processing software and orthotics. BCI technology could therefore provide a new communication and control option for individuals who cannot otherwise express their wishes to the outside world. Signal processing and classification methods are essential tools in the development of improved BCI technology. We organized the BCI Competition 2003 to evaluate the current state of the art of these tools. Four laboratories well versed in EEG-based BCI research provided six data sets in a documented format. We made these data sets (i.e., labeled training sets and unlabeled test sets) and their descriptions available on the Internet. The goal in the competition was to maximize the performance measure for the test labels. Researchers worldwide tested their algorithms and competed for the best classification results. This paper describes the six data sets and the results and function of the most successful algorithms.}, keywords = {augmentative communication, BCI, beta-rhythm, brain-computer interface, EEG, ERP, imagined hand movements, lateralized readiness potential, mu-rhythm, P300, Rehabilitation, single-trial classification, slow cortical potentials}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.826692}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15188876}, author = {Benjamin Blankertz and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Curio, Gabriel and Theresa M Vaughan and Gerwin Schalk and Jonathan Wolpaw and Schl{\"o}gl, Alois and Neuper, Christa and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Hinterberger, Thilo and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2167, title = {The BCI Competition 2003: Progress and perspectives in detection and discrimination of EEG single trials.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Biomed Eng}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1044-51}, abstract = {Interest in developing a new method of man-to-machine communication--a brain-computer interface (BCI)--has grown steadily over the past few decades. BCIs create a new communication channel between the brain and an output device by bypassing conventional motor output pathways of nerves and muscles. These systems use signals recorded from the scalp, the surface of the cortex, or from inside the brain to enable users to control a variety of applications including simple word-processing software and orthotics. BCI technology could therefore provide a new communication and control option for individuals who cannot otherwise express their wishes to the outside world. Signal processing and classification methods are essential tools in the development of improved BCI technology. We organized the BCI Competition 2003 to evaluate the current state of the art of these tools. Four laboratories well versed in EEG-based BCI research provided six data sets in a documented format. We made these data sets (i.e., labeled training sets and unlabeled test sets) and their descriptions available on the Internet. The goal in the competition was to maximize the performance measure for the test labels. Researchers worldwide tested their algorithms and competed for the best classification results. This paper describes the six data sets and the results and function of the most successful algorithms.}, keywords = {Adult, Algorithms, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Artificial Intelligence, Brain, Cognition, Databases, Factual, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.826692}, author = {Benjamin Blankertz and M{\"u}ller, Klaus-Robert and Curio, Gabriel and Theresa M Vaughan and Gerwin Schalk and Jonathan Wolpaw and Schl{\"o}gl, Alois and Neuper, Christa and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Hinterberger, T. and Schr{\"o}der, Michael and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {2166, title = {BCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Biomed Eng}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1034-43}, abstract = {Many laboratories have begun to develop brain-computer interface (BCI) systems that provide communication and control capabilities to people with severe motor disabilities. Further progress and realization of practical applications depends on systematic evaluations and comparisons of different brain signals, recording methods, processing algorithms, output formats, and operating protocols. However, the typical BCI system is designed specifically for one particular BCI method and is, therefore, not suited to the systematic studies that are essential for continued progress. In response to this problem, we have developed a documented general-purpose BCI research and development platform called BCI2000. BCI2000 can incorporate alone or in combination any brain signals, signal processing methods, output devices, and operating protocols. This report is intended to describe to investigators, biomedical engineers, and computer scientists the concepts that the BC12000 system is based upon and gives examples of successful BCI implementations using this system. To date, we have used BCI2000 to create BCI systems for a variety of brain signals, processing methods, and applications. The data show that these systems function well in online operation and that BCI2000 satisfies the stringent real-time requirements of BCI systems. By substantially reducing labor and cost, BCI2000 facilitates the implementation of different BCI systems and other psychophysiological experiments. It is available with full documentation and free of charge for research or educational purposes and is currently being used in a variety of studies by many research groups.}, keywords = {Algorithms, Brain, Cognition, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computer Peripherals, Electroencephalography, Equipment Design, Equipment Failure Analysis, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Systems Integration, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.827072}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Hinterberger, T. and Niels Birbaumer and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {3223, title = {BCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system.}, journal = {IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering}, volume = {51}, year = {2004}, month = {06/2004}, pages = {1034{\textendash}1043}, abstract = {Many laboratories have begun to develop brain-computer interface (BCI) systems that provide communication and control capabilities to people with severe motor disabilities. Further progress and realization of practical applications depends on systematic evaluations and comparisons of different brain signals, recording methods, processing algorithms, output formats, and operating protocols. However, the typical BCI system is designed specifically for one particular BCI method and is, therefore, not suited to the systematic studies that are essential for continued progress. In response to this problem, we have developed a documented general-purpose BCI research and development platform called BCI2000. BCI2000 can incorporate alone or in combination any brain signals, signal processing methods, output devices, and operating protocols. This report is intended to describe to investigators, biomedical engineers, and computer scientists the concepts that the BC12000 system is based upon and gives examples of successful BCI implementations using this system. To date, we have used BCI2000 to create BCI systems for a variety of brain signals, processing methods, and applications. The data show that these systems function well in online operation and that BCI2000 satisfies the stringent real-time requirements of BCI systems. By substantially reducing labor and cost, BCI2000 facilitates the implementation of different BCI systems and other psychophysiological experiments. It is available with full documentation and free of charge for research or educational purposes and is currently being used in a variety of studies by many research groups.}, keywords = {User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0018-9294}, doi = {10.1109/TBME.2004.827072}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15188875}, author = {Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Hinterberger, Thilo and Niels Birbaumer and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2269, title = {P300 for communication: Evidence from patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).}, journal = {Biomedizinische Technik}, year = {2004}, author = {Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Nijboer, F and Pawelzik, H and Gerwin Schalk and Dennis J. McFarland and Theresa M Vaughan and Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Kuebler, A.} } @article {3226, title = {Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the Second International Meeting.}, journal = {IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society}, volume = {11}, year = {2003}, month = {06/2003}, pages = {94{\textendash}109}, abstract = {This paper summarizes the Brain-Computer Interfaces for Communication and Control, The Second International Meeting, held in Rensselaerville, NY, in June 2002. Sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and organized by the Wadsworth Center of the New York State Department of Health, the meeting addressed current work and future plans in brain-computer interface (BCI) research. Ninety-two researchers representing 38 different research groups from the United States, Canada, Europe, and China participated. The BCIs discussed at the meeting use electroencephalographic activity recorded from the scalp or single-neuron activity recorded within cortex to control cursor movement, select letters or icons, or operate neuroprostheses. The central element in each BCI is a translation algorithm that converts electrophysiological input from the user into output that controls external devices. BCI operation depends on effective interaction between two adaptive controllers, the user who encodes his or her commands in the electrophysiological input provided to the BCI, and the BCI that recognizes the commands contained in the input and expresses them in device control. Current BCIs have maximum information transfer rates of up to 25 b/min. Achievement of greater speed and accuracy requires improvements in signal acquisition and processing, in translation algorithms, and in user training. These improvements depend on interdisciplinary cooperation among neuroscientists, engineers, computer programmers, psychologists, and rehabilitation specialists, and on adoption and widespread application of objective criteria for evaluating alternative methods. The practical use of BCI technology will be determined by the development of appropriate applications and identification of appropriate user groups, and will require careful attention to the needs and desires of individual users.}, keywords = {augmentative communication, Brain-computer interface (BCI), electroencephalography (EEG), Rehabilitation}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2003.814799}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12899247}, author = {Theresa M Vaughan and Heetderks, William J. and Trejo, Leonard J. and Rymer, William Z. and Weinrich, Michael and Moore, Melody M. and K{\"u}bler, Andrea and Dobkin, Bruce H. and Niels Birbaumer and Emanuel Donchin and Wolpaw, Elizabeth Winter and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @article {2268, title = {Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control.}, journal = {Clin Neurophysiol}, volume = {113}, year = {2002}, month = {06/2002}, pages = {767-91}, abstract = {

For many years people have speculated that electroencephalographic activity or other electrophysiological measures of brain function might provide a new non-muscular channel for sending messages and commands to the external world - a brain-computer interface (BCI). Over the past 15 years, productive BCI research programs have arisen. Encouraged by new understanding of brain function, by the advent of powerful low-cost computer equipment, and by growing recognition of the needs and potentials of people with disabilities, these programs concentrate on developing new augmentative communication and\ controltechnology for those with severe neuromuscular disorders, such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, brainstem stroke, and spinal cord injury. The immediate goal is to provide these users, who may be completely paralyzed, or {\textquoteright}locked in{\textquoteright}, with basic communication capabilities so that they can express their wishes to caregivers or even operate word processing programs or neuroprostheses. Present-day BCIs determine the intent of the user from a variety of different electrophysiological signals. These signals include slow cortical potentials, P300 potentials, and mu or beta rhythms recorded from the scalp, and cortical neuronal activity recorded by implanted electrodes. They are translated in real-time into commands that operate a computer display or other device. Successful operation requires that the user encode commands in these signals and that the BCI derive the commands from the signals. Thus, the user and the BCI system need to adapt to each other both initially and continually so as to ensure stable performance. Current BCIs have maximum information transfer rates up to 10-25bits/min. This limited capacity can be valuable for people whose severe disabilities prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. At the same time, many possible applications of BCI technology, such as neuroprosthesis\ control, may require higher information transfer rates. Future progress will depend on: recognition that BCI research and development is an interdisciplinary problem, involving neurobiology, psychology, engineering, mathematics, and computer science; identification of those signals, whether evoked potentials, spontaneous rhythms, or neuronal firing rates, that users are best able to\ control\ independent of activity in conventional motor output pathways; development of training methods for helping users to gain and maintain that\ control; delineation of the best algorithms for translating these signals into device commands; attention to the identification and elimination of artifacts such as electromyographic and electro-oculographic activity; adoption of precise and objective procedures for evaluating BCI performance; recognition of the need for long-term as well as short-term assessment of BCI performance; identification of appropriate BCI applications and appropriate matching of applications and users; and attention to factors that affect user acceptance of augmentative technology, including ease of use, cosmesis, and provision of those communication and\ control\ capacities that are most important to the user. Development of BCI technology will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed research publications and avoidance of the hyperbolic and often misleading media attention that tends to generate unrealistic expectations in the public and skepticism in other researchers. With adequate recognition and effective engagement of all these issues, BCI systems could eventually provide an important new communication and\ control\ option for those with motor disabilities and might also give those without disabilities a supplementary\ control\ channel or a\ control\ channel useful in special circumstances.

}, keywords = {Brain Diseases, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computer Systems, Electroencephalography, Humans, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1388-2457}, doi = {10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00057-3}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12048038}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Dennis J. McFarland and Pfurtscheller, Gert and Theresa M Vaughan} } @article {3230, title = {Brain-computer communication: unlocking the locked in.}, journal = {Psychological bulletin}, volume = {127}, year = {2001}, month = {05/2001}, pages = {358{\textendash}375}, abstract = {With the increasing efficiency of life-support systems and better intensive care, more patients survive severe injuries of the brain and spinal cord. Many of these patients experience locked-in syndrome: The active mind is locked in a paralyzed body. Consequently, communication is extremely restricted or impossible. A muscle-independent communication channel overcomes this problem and is realized through a brain-computer interface, a direct connection between brain and computer. The number of technically elaborated brain-computer interfaces is in contrast with the number of systems used in the daily life of locked-in patients. It is hypothesized that a profound knowledge and consideration of psychological principles are necessary to make brain-computer interfaces feasible for locked-in patients.}, keywords = {User-Computer Interface}, issn = {0033-2909}, doi = {10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.358}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11393301}, author = {K{\"u}bler, A. and Kotchoubey, B. and Kaiser, J. and Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer} } @article {3236, title = {Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting.}, journal = {IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society}, volume = {8}, year = {2000}, month = {06/2000}, pages = {164{\textendash}173}, abstract = {Over the past decade, many laboratories have begun to explore brain-computer interface (BCI) technology as a radically new communication option for those with neuromuscular impairments that prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. BCI{\textquoteright}s provide these users with communication channels that do not depend on peripheral nerves and muscles. This article summarizes the first international meeting devoted to BCI research and development. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s use electroencephalographic (EEG) activity recorded at the scalp or single-unit activity recorded from within cortex to control cursor movement, select letters or icons, or operate a neuroprosthesis. The central element in each BCI is a translation algorithm that converts electrophysiological input from the user into output that controls external devices. BCI operation depends on effective interaction between two adaptive controllers, the user who encodes his or her commands in the electrophysiological input provided to the BCI, and the BCI which recognizes the commands contained in the input and expresses them in device control. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s have maximum information transfer rates of 5-25 b/min. Achievement of greater speed and accuracy depends on improvements in signal processing, translation algorithms, and user training. These improvements depend on increased interdisciplinary cooperation between neuroscientists, engineers, computer programmers, psychologists, and rehabilitation specialists, and on adoption and widespread application of objective methods for evaluating alternative methods. The practical use of BCI technology depends on the development of appropriate applications, identification of appropriate user groups, and careful attention to the needs and desires of individual users. BCI research and development will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed publications, and from adoption of standard venues for presentations and discussion.}, keywords = {augmentative communication, Brain-computer interface (BCI), electroencephalography (EEG)}, issn = {1063-6528}, doi = {10.1109/TRE.2000.847807}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10896178}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Heetderks, W. J. and Dennis J. McFarland and Peckham, P. H. and Gerwin Schalk and Emanuel Donchin and Quatrano, L. A. and Robinson, C. J. and Theresa M Vaughan} } @article {2163, title = {Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng}, volume = {8}, year = {2000}, month = {06/2000}, pages = {164-73}, abstract = {

Over the past decade, many laboratories have begun to explore brain-computer interface (BCI) technology as a radically new communication option for those with neuromuscular impairments that prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. BCI{\textquoteright}s provide these users with communication channels that do not depend on peripheral nerves and muscles. This article summarizes the first international meeting devoted to BCI research and development. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s use electroencephalographic (EEG) activity recorded at the scalp or single-unit activity recorded from within cortex to control cursor movement, select letters or icons, or operate a neuroprosthesis. The central element in each BCI is a translation algorithm that converts electrophysiological input from the user into output that controls external devices. BCI operation depends on effective interaction between two adaptive controllers, the user who encodes his or her commands in the electrophysiological input provided to the BCI, and the BCI which recognizes the commands contained in the input and expresses them in device control. Current BCI{\textquoteright}s have maximum information transfer rates of 5-25 b/min. Achievement of greater speed and accuracy depends on improvements in signal processing, translation algorithms, and user training. These improvements depend on increased interdisciplinary cooperation between neuroscientists, engineers, computer programmers, psychologists, and rehabilitation specialists, and on adoption and widespread application of objective methods for evaluating alternative methods. The practical use of BCI technology depends on the development of appropriate applications, identification of appropriate user groups, and careful attention to the needs and desires of individual users. BCI research and development will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed publications, and from adoption of standard venues for presentations and discussion.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Cerebral Cortex, Communication Aids for Disabled, Disabled Persons, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Neuromuscular Diseases, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1063-6528}, doi = {10.1109/TRE.2000.847807}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10896178}, author = {Jonathan Wolpaw and Niels Birbaumer and Heetderks, W J and Dennis J. McFarland and Peckham, P H and Gerwin Schalk and Emanuel Donchin and Quatrano, L A and Robinson, C J and Theresa M Vaughan} }