04388nas a2200385 4500008004100000022001400041245009500055210006900150260001200219300001100231490000800242520325500250653001003505653003403515653002103549653001003570653003603580653002403616653002703640653002103667653001103688653000903699653004103708653002803749100002603777700002503803700001403828700001903842700001403861700001503875700002503890700002103915700001803936856004803954 2011 eng d a1872-895200aTransition from the locked in to the completely locked-in state: a physiological analysis.0 aTransition from the locked in to the completely lockedin state a c06/2011 a925-330 v1223 a

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.

10aAdult10aAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis10aArea Under Curve10aBrain10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aDisease Progression10aElectroencephalography10aElectromyography10aHumans10aMale10aSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted10aUser-Computer Interface1 aMurguialday, Ramos, A1 aHill, Jeremy, Jeremy1 aBensch, M1 aMartens, S M M1 aHalder, S1 aNijboer, F1 aSchoelkopf, Bernhard1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aGharabaghi, A uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2088829203153nas a2200481 4500008004100000022001400041245008200055210006900137260001200206300001000218490000700228520180600235653001002041653002802051653002002079653003602099653002402135653002702159653002402186653001102210653001102221653001602232653000902248653001602257653001902273653001702292653004102309653001302350653002502363653001702388653002802405653001202433100002002445700001802465700001302483700002502496700002402521700001802545700001802563700002102581700002102602856004802623 2008 eng d a1525-506900aVoluntary brain regulation and communication with electrocorticogram signals.0 aVoluntary brain regulation and communication with electrocortico c08/2008 a300-60 v133 a

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.

10aAdult10aBiofeedback, Psychology10aCerebral Cortex10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aDominance, Cerebral10aElectroencephalography10aEpilepsies, Partial10aFemale10aHumans10aImagination10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMotor Activity10aMotor Cortex10aSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted10aSoftware10aSomatosensory Cortex10aTheta Rhythm10aUser-Computer Interface10aWriting1 aHinterberger, T1 aWidman, Guido1 aLal, T N1 aHill, Jeremy, Jeremy1 aTangermann, Michael1 aRosenstiel, W1 aSchölkopf, B1 aElger, Christian1 aBirbaumer, Niels uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1849554103540nas a2200457 4500008004100000022001400041245004900055210004100104260001200145300001100157490000700168520234400175653001002519653001502529653001402544653001002558653002702568653002702595653002102622653001302643653001102656653000902667653000902676653001902685653001102704653003102715653002702746653000902773653001302782653003302795653004102828653002802869100002302897700001902920700002102939700002002960700001802980700002102998700001503019856004803034 2007 eng d a1053-811900aAn MEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI).0 aMEGbased braincomputer interface BCI c07/2007 a581-930 v363 a

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.

10aAdult10aAlgorithms10aArtifacts10aBrain10aElectroencephalography10aElectromagnetic Fields10aElectromyography10aFeedback10aFemale10aFoot10aHand10aHead Movements10aHumans10aMagnetic Resonance Imaging10aMagnetoencephalography10aMale10aMovement10aPrincipal Component Analysis10aSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted10aUser-Computer Interface1 aMellinger, Jürgen1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aBraun, Christoph1 aPreissl, Hubert1 aRosenstiel, W1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aKübler, A uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1747551103802nas a2200385 4500008004100000022001400041245008700055210006900142260001200211300001000223490000700233520264300240653001502883653001002898653003602908653002302944653002702967653002202994653001103016653002703027653002403054653003803078653002803116100002403144700002603168700002403194700001903218700002103237700002003258700002403278700002203302700002303324700002103347856004803368 2006 eng d a1534-432000aThe BCI competition III: Validating alternative approaches to actual BCI problems.0 aBCI competition III Validating alternative approaches to actual  c06/2006 a153-90 v143 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'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.

10aAlgorithms10aBrain10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aDatabases, Factual10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials10aHumans10aNeuromuscular Diseases10aSoftware Validation10aTechnology Assessment, Biomedical10aUser-Computer Interface1 aBlankertz, Benjamin1 aMüller, Klaus-Robert1 aKrusienski, Dean, J1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aWolpaw, Jonathan1 aSchlögl, Alois1 aPfurtscheller, Gert1 aMillán, José, R1 aSchröder, Michael1 aBirbaumer, Niels uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1679228202785nas a2200445 4500008004100000022001400041245015300055210006900208260001200277300001000289490000700299520147600306653001501782653002801797653002101825653002701846653002701873653002201900653001101922653001101933653001601944653000901960653001601969653001401985653003501999653002802034100002502062700001302087700002302100700002002123700002102143700001502164700001902179700001802198700002102216700001802237700001502255700002102270856004802291 2006 eng d a1534-432000aClassifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fast BCI implementation: comparison of nonparalyzed and completely paralyzed subjects.0 aClassifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fa c06/2006 a183-60 v143 a

We summarize results from a series of related studies that aim to develop a motor-imagery-based brain-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.

10aAlgorithms10aArtificial Intelligence10aCluster Analysis10aComputer User Training10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials10aFemale10aHumans10aImagination10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aParalysis10aPattern Recognition, Automated10aUser-Computer Interface1 aHill, Jeremy, Jeremy1 aLal, T N1 aSchröder, Michael1 aHinterberger, T1 aWilhelm, Barbara1 aNijboer, F1 aMochty, Ursula1 aWidman, Guido1 aElger, Christian1 aSchölkopf, B1 aKübler, A1 aBirbaumer, Niels uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1679228902332nas a2200457 4500008004100000022001400041245009000055210006900145260001200214300001100226490000700237520103300244653000901277653003401286653002701320653002901347653003701376653001101413653001101424653001601435653000901451653001601460653001701476653001301493653001401506653002301520653002801543653002501571653002201596653002801618100001501646700001501661700002301676700002401699700001601723700001901739700002601758700002101784700002101805856004801826 2005 eng d a1526-632X00aPatients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brain-computer interface.0 aPatients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brai c05/2005 a1775-70 v643 a

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.

10aAged10aAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials, Motor10aEvoked Potentials, Somatosensory10aFemale10aHumans10aImagination10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMotor Cortex10aMovement10aParalysis10aPhotic Stimulation10aProstheses and Implants10aSomatosensory Cortex10aTreatment Outcome10aUser-Computer Interface1 aKübler, A1 aNijboer, F1 aMellinger, Jürgen1 aVaughan, Theresa, M1 aPawelzik, H1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aMcFarland, Dennis, J.1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aWolpaw, Jonathan uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1591180902760nas a2200433 4500008004100000022001400041245011000055210006900165260001200234300001200246490000700258520140000265653001001665653001501675653003401690653002801724653001001752653001401762653002301776653002701799653002201826653001101848653003101859653003201890653002801922100002401950700002601974700001902000700002402019700001902043700002102062700002002083700002002103700002402123700002002147700002302167700002102190856011502211 2004 eng d a0018-929400aThe BCI Competition 2003: Progress and perspectives in detection and discrimination of EEG single trials.0 aBCI Competition 2003 Progress and perspectives in detection and  c06/2004 a1044-510 v513 aInterest 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.10aAdult10aAlgorithms10aAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis10aArtificial Intelligence10aBrain10aCognition10aDatabases, Factual10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials10aHumans10aReproducibility of Results10aSensitivity and Specificity10aUser-Computer Interface1 aBlankertz, Benjamin1 aMüller, Klaus-Robert1 aCurio, Gabriel1 aVaughan, Theresa, M1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aWolpaw, Jonathan1 aSchlögl, Alois1 aNeuper, Christa1 aPfurtscheller, Gert1 aHinterberger, T1 aSchröder, Michael1 aBirbaumer, Niels uhttps://www.neurotechcenter.org/publications/2004/bci-competition-2003-progress-and-perspectives-detection-and02705nas a2200337 4500008004100000022001400041245007000055210006400125260001200189300001200201490000700213520166200220653001501882653001001897653001401907653003601921653002501957653002701982653002102009653003102030653002202061653001102083653002402094653002802118100001902146700002602165700002002191700002102211700002102232856011402253 2004 eng d a0018-929400aBCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system.0 aBCI2000 a generalpurpose braincomputer interface BCI system c06/2004 a1034-430 v513 aMany 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.10aAlgorithms10aBrain10aCognition10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aComputer Peripherals10aElectroencephalography10aEquipment Design10aEquipment Failure Analysis10aEvoked Potentials10aHumans10aSystems Integration10aUser-Computer Interface1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aMcFarland, Dennis, J.1 aHinterberger, T1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aWolpaw, Jonathan uhttps://www.neurotechcenter.org/publications/2004/bci2000-general-purpose-brain-computer-interface-bci-system06596nas a2200265 4500008004100000022001400041245006100055210005900116260001200175300001100187490000800198520581800206653001906024653003606043653002106079653002706100653001106127653002806138100002106166700002106187700002606208700002406234700002406258856004806282 2002 eng d a1388-245700aBrain-computer interfaces for communication and control.0 aBraincomputer interfaces for communication and control c06/2002 a767-910 v1133 a

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 'locked in', 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.

10aBrain Diseases10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aComputer Systems10aElectroencephalography10aHumans10aUser-Computer Interface1 aWolpaw, Jonathan1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aMcFarland, Dennis, J.1 aPfurtscheller, Gert1 aVaughan, Theresa, M uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1204803803091nas a2200373 4500008004100000022001400041245008600055210006900141260001200210300001100222490000600233520197800239653001502217653002002232653003602252653002102288653002702309653002202336653001102358653002702369653004102396653002802437100002102465700002102486700001902507700002602526700001702552700001902569700002102588700001802609700001802627700002402645856004802669 2000 eng d a1063-652800aBrain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting.0 aBraincomputer interface technology a review of the first interna c06/2000 a164-730 v83 a

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'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'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'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.

10aAlgorithms10aCerebral Cortex10aCommunication Aids for Disabled10aDisabled Persons10aElectroencephalography10aEvoked Potentials10aHumans10aNeuromuscular Diseases10aSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted10aUser-Computer Interface1 aWolpaw, Jonathan1 aBirbaumer, Niels1 aHeetderks, W J1 aMcFarland, Dennis, J.1 aPeckham, P H1 aSchalk, Gerwin1 aDonchin, Emanuel1 aQuatrano, L A1 aRobinson, C J1 aVaughan, Theresa, M uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10896178