<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>5</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jeremy Jeremy Hill</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lal, T.N</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schröder, Michael</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hinterberger, T.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Widman, Guido</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Elger, Christian</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schölkopf, B</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Niels Birbaumer</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Franke, Katrin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Müller, Klaus-Robert</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nickolay, Bertram</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schäfer, Ralf</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Classifying Event-Related Desynchronization in EEG, ECoG and MEG Signals.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pattern Recognition</style></secondary-title><tertiary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lecture Notes in Computer Science</style></tertiary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11861898_41</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Springer Berlin / Heidelberg</style></publisher><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4174</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">404-413</style></pages><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">978-3-540-44412-1</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: #333333; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 20px;&quot;&gt;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, 75–100 trials in MEG, or 25–50 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.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>