Cognitive Neurodynamics

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 21–30 | Cite as

Single tap identification for fast BCI control

Research article

Abstract

One of the major aims of BCI research is devoted to achieving faster and more efficient control of external devices. The identification of individual tap events in a motor imagery BCI is therefore a desirable goal. EEG is recorded from subjects performing and imagining finger taps with their left and right hands. A Differential Evolution based feature selection wrapper is used in order to identify optimal features in the spatial and frequency domains for tap identification. Channel-frequency band combinations are found which allow differentiation of tap vs. no-tap control conditions for executed and imagined taps. Left vs. right hand taps may also be differentiated with features found in this manner. A sliding time window is then used to accurately identify individual taps in the executed tap and imagined tap conditions. Highly statistically significant classification accuracies are achieved with time windows of 0.5 s and more allowing taps to be identified on a single trial basis.

Keywords

BCI DE Feature selection Finger tapping Single trial 

References

  1. Ang KK (2008) A clinical evaluation of non-invasive motor imagery-based brain-computer interface in stroke. Proc A Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008:4178–4181Google Scholar
  2. Balakrishnan D, Puthusserypady S (2005) Multilayer perceptrons for the classification of brain computer interface data. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 31st annual Northeast bioengineering conference, 2005. IEEE, pp 118–119Google Scholar
  3. Birbaumer N (2000) The Thought Translation Device (TTD) for completely paralyzed patients. IEEE Trans Rehab Eng 8(2):190–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blankertz B, Dornhege G, Krauledat M, Müller KR, Kunzmann V, Losch F, Curio G (2006) The Berlin Brain-computer interface: EEG-based communication without subject training. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng Publ IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 14(2):147–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Congedo M, Lotte F, Lecuyer A (2006) Classification of movement intention by spatially filtered electromagnetic inverse solutions. Phys Med Biol 51(8):1971–1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dennis J, McFarland William A, Sarnacki JRW (2003) Brain-computer interface (BCI) operation: optimizing information transfer rates. Biol Psychol 63:237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fabiani GE, McFarland DJ, Wolpaw JR, Pfurtscheller G (2004) Conversion of EEG activity into cursor movement by a brain-computer interface (BCI). IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng Publ IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc12(3):331–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jeannerod M (1995) Mental imagery in the motor cortex. Neuropsychologia 33:1143–1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C (2001) Motor imagery and direct brain-computer communication. Proc IEEE 89(7):1123–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Portelli AJ, Nasuto SJ (2008) Toward construction of an inexpensive brain computer interface for goal oriented applications. In: AISB, Aberdeen, AISB, pp 2–7Google Scholar
  11. Stavrinou ML, Moraru L, Pelekouda P, Kokkinos V (2006) A wavelet tool to discriminate imagery versus actual finger movements towards a brain computer interface. In: Biological and medical data analysis of 7th international symposium, Thessaloniki, Greece, pp 323–333Google Scholar
  12. Storn R, Price K (1995) Differential evolution—a simple and effiecient adaptive scheme for global optimzation over continous spacesGoogle Scholar
  13. Thulasidas M, Guan C, Wu J (2006) Robust classification of EEG signal for brain–computer interface. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng Publ IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 14(1):24–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Vaughan TM (2006) The Wadsworth BCI research and development program: at home with BCI. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehab Eng Publ IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 14(2):229–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Williams N, Daly I, Nasuto SJ, Saddy D, Warwick K (2009) ERP classification using empirical mode decomposition. In: The 5th UK and RI postgraduate conference in biomedical engineering & medical physics, Oxford, pp 5–6Google Scholar
  16. Wolpaw JR (2007) Brain–computer interfaces as new brain output pathways. J Physiol 579(Pt 3):613–619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations