@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 {2176, title = {BCI meeting 2005 - Workshop on Technology: Hardware and Software.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {128-31}, abstract = {

This paper describes the outcome of discussions held during the Third International BCI Meeting at a workshop to review and evaluate the current state of BCI-related hardware and software. Technical requirements and current technologies, standardization procedures and future trends are covered. The main conclusion was recognition of the need to focus technical requirements on the users{\textquoteright} needs and the need for consistent standards in BCI research.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, Biotechnology, Brain, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computers, Electroencephalography, Equipment Design, Humans, Internationality, Man-Machine Systems, Neuromuscular Diseases, Software, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875584}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792276}, author = {Cincotti, F and Bianchi, L and Birch, Gary and Guger, C and Mellinger, J{\"u}rgen and Scherer, Reinhold and Schmidt, Robert N and Y{\'a}{\~n}ez Su{\'a}rez, Oscar and Gerwin Schalk} } @article {2175, title = {ECoG factors underlying multimodal control of a brain-computer interface.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {246-50}, abstract = {

Most current brain-computer interface (BCI) systems for humans use electroencephalographic activity recorded from the scalp, and may be limited in many ways. Electrocorticography (ECoG) is believed to be a minimally-invasive alternative to electroencephalogram (EEG) for BCI systems, yielding superior signal characteristics that could allow rapid user training and faster communication rates. In addition, our preliminary results suggest that brain regions other than the sensorimotor cortex, such as auditory cortex, may be trained to control a BCI system using similar methods as those used to train motor regions of the brain. This could prove to be vital for users who have neurological disease, head trauma, or other conditions precluding the use of sensorimotor cortex for BCI control.

}, keywords = {Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Communication Aids for Disabled, Computer Peripherals, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Man-Machine Systems, Neuromuscular Diseases, Systems Integration, User-Computer Interface, Volition}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875570}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792305}, author = {Adam J Wilson and Felton, Elizabeth A and Garell, P Charles and Gerwin Schalk and Williams, Justin C} } @article {2177, title = {The Wadsworth BCI Research and Development Program: At Home with BCI.}, journal = {IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {06/2006}, pages = {229-33}, abstract = {

The ultimate goal of brain-computer interface (BCI) technology is to provide communication and control capacities to people with severe motor disabilities. BCI research at the Wadsworth Center focuses primarily on noninvasive,\ electroencephalography\ (EEG)-based BCI methods. We have shown that people, including those with severe motor disabilities, can learn to use sensorimotor rhythms (SMRs) to move a cursor rapidly and accurately in one or two dimensions. We have also improved P300-based BCI operation. We are now translating this laboratory-proven BCI technology into a system that can be used by severely disabled people in their homes with minimal ongoing technical oversight. To accomplish this, we have: improved our general-purpose BCI software (BCI2000); improved online adaptation and feature translation for SMR-based BCI operation; improved the accuracy and bandwidth of P300-based BCI operation; reduced the\ complexity\ of system hardware and software and begun to evaluate home system use in appropriate users. These developments have resulted in prototype systems for every day use in people{\textquoteright}s homes.

}, keywords = {Animals, Brain, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Neuromuscular Diseases, New York, Research, Switzerland, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Universities, User-Computer Interface}, issn = {1534-4320}, doi = {10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875577}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16792301}, author = {Theresa M Vaughan and Dennis J. McFarland and Gerwin Schalk and Sarnacki, William A and Krusienski, Dean J and Sellers, Eric W and Jonathan Wolpaw} } @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} }