Sijie Zhou, Jing Jin, Ian Daly, Xingyu Wang, Andrzej Cichocki
Abstract
Many recent studies have focused on improving the performance of event-related potential (ERP) based brain computer interfaces (BCIs). The use of a face pattern has been shown to obtain high classification accuracies and information transfer rates (ITRs) by evoking discriminative ERPs (N200 and N400) in addition to P300 potentials. Recently, it has been proved that the performance of traditional P300-based BCIs could be improved through a modification of the mismatch pattern. In this paper, a mismatch inverted face pattern (MIF-pattern) was presented to improve the performance of the inverted face pattern (IF-pattern), one of the state of the art patterns used in visual-based BCI systems. Ten subjects attended in this experiment. The result showed that the mismatch inverted face pattern could evoke significantly larger vertex positive potentials (p < 0.05) and N400s (p < 0.05) compared to the inverted face pattern. The classification accuracy (mean accuracy is 99.58%) and ITRs (mean bit rate is 27.88 bit/min) of the mismatch inverted face pattern was significantly higher than that of the inverted face pattern (p < 0.05).
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 07 October 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,135
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,443
of 327,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#119
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 327,744 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
