Biomedical subjects

Dean J Krusienski

Publications and source records attributed to Dean J Krusienski.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

A comparison of classification techniques for the P300 Speller.

This study assesses the relative performance characteristics of five established classification techniques on data collected using the P300 Speller paradigm, originally described by Farwell and Donchin (1988 Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. 70 510). Four linear methods: Pearson's correlation method (PCM), Fisher's linear discriminant (FLD), stepwise linear discriminant analysis (SWLDA) and a linear support vector machine (LSVM); and one nonlinear method: Gaussian kernel support vector machine (GSVM), are compared for classifying offline data from eight users. The relative performance of the classifiers is evaluated, along with the practical concerns regarding the implementation of the respective methods. The results indicate that while all methods attained acceptable performance levels, SWLDA and FLD provide the best overall performance and implementation characteristics for practical classification of P300 Speller data.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

A P300 event-related potential brain-computer interface (BCI): the effects of matrix size and inter stimulus interval on performance.

We describe a study designed to assess properties of a P300 brain-computer interface (BCI). The BCI presents the user with a matrix containing letters and numbers. The user attends to a character to be communicated and the rows and columns of the matrix briefly intensify. Each time the attended character is intensified it serves as a rare event in an oddball sequence and it elicits a P300 response. The BCI works by detecting which character elicited a P300 response. We manipulated the size of the character matrix (either 3 x 3 or 6 x 6) and the duration of the inter stimulus interval (ISI) between intensifications (either 175 or 350 ms). Online accuracy was highest for the 3 x 3 matrix 175-ms ISI condition, while bit rate was highest for the 6 x 6 matrix 175-ms ISI condition. Average accuracy in the best condition for each subject was 88%. P300 amplitude was significantly greater for the attended stimulus and for the 6 x 6 matrix. This work demonstrates that matrix size and ISI are important variables to consider when optimizing a BCI system for individual users and that a P300-BCI can be used for effective communication.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Brain-computer interface signal processing at the Wadsworth Center: mu and sensorimotor beta rhythms.

The Wadsworth brain-computer interface (BCI), based on mu and beta sensorimotor rhythms, uses one- and two-dimensional cursor movement tasks and relies on user training. This is a real-time closed-loop system. Signal processing consists of channel selection, spatial filtering, and spectral analysis. Feature translation uses a regression approach and normalization. Adaptation occurs at several points in this process on the basis of different criteria and methods. It can use either feedforward (e.g., estimating the signal mean for normalization) or feedback control (e.g., estimating feature weights for the prediction equation). We view this process as the interaction between a dynamic user and a dynamic system that coadapt over time. Understanding the dynamics of this interaction and optimizing its performance represent a major challenge for BCI research.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

PubMed2006

The Wadsworth BCI Research and Development Program: at home with BCI.

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's homes.

Animals↗

PubMed2006

BCI Meeting 2005--workshop on BCI signal processing: feature extraction and translation.

This paper describes the outcome of discussions held during the Third International BCI Meeting at a workshop charged with reviewing and evaluating the current state of and issues relevant to brain-computer interface (BCI) feature extraction and translation. The issues discussed include a taxonomy of methods and applications, time-frequency spatial analysis, optimization schemes, the role of insight in analysis, adaptation, and methods for quantifying BCI feedback.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2006

The BCI competition. III: Validating alternative approaches to actual BCI problems.

A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a system that allows its users to control external devices with brain activity. 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.

Algorithms↗