↓ Skip to main content

Enhancing Performance and Bit Rates in a Brain–Computer Interface System With Phase-to-Amplitude Cross-Frequency Coupling: Evidences From Traditional c-VEP, Fast c-VEP, and SSVEP Designs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Enhancing Performance and Bit Rates in a Brain–Computer Interface System With Phase-to-Amplitude Cross-Frequency Coupling: Evidences From Traditional c-VEP, Fast c-VEP, and SSVEP Designs
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2018.00019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stavros I. Dimitriadis, Avraam D. Marimpis

Abstract

A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a channel of communication that transforms brain activity into specific commands for manipulating a personal computer or other home or electrical devices. In other words, a BCI is an alternative way of interacting with the environment by using brain activity instead of muscles and nerves. For that reason, BCI systems are of high clinical value for targeted populations suffering from neurological disorders. In this paper, we present a new processing approach in three publicly available BCI data sets: (a) a well-known multi-class (N = 6) coded-modulated Visual Evoked potential (c-VEP)-based BCI system for able-bodied and disabled subjects; (b) a multi-class (N = 32) c-VEP with slow and fast stimulus representation; and (c) a steady-state Visual Evoked potential (SSVEP) multi-class (N = 5) flickering BCI system. Estimating cross-frequency coupling (CFC) and namely δ-θ [δ: (0.5-4 Hz), θ: (4-8 Hz)] phase-to-amplitude coupling (PAC) within sensor and across experimental time, we succeeded in achieving high classification accuracy and Information Transfer Rates (ITR) in the three data sets. Our approach outperformed the originally presented ITR on the three data sets. The bit rates obtained for both the disabled and able-bodied subjects reached the fastest reported level of 324 bits/min with the PAC estimator. Additionally, our approach outperformed alternative signal features such as the relative power (29.73 bits/min) and raw time series analysis (24.93 bits/min) and also the original reported bit rates of 10-25 bits/min. In the second data set, we succeeded in achieving an average ITR of 124.40 ± 11.68 for the slow 60 Hz and an average ITR of 233.99 ± 15.75 for the fast 120 Hz. In the third data set, we succeeded in achieving an average ITR of 106.44 ± 8.94. Current methodology outperforms any previous methodologies applied to each of the three free available BCI datasets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 33%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 24%
Neuroscience 5 15%
Engineering 4 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,868,104
of 23,572,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#565
of 773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,417
of 328,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#18
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,572,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.