Objective: To assess the feasibility and robustness of an asynchronous and non-invasive EEG-based Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) for continuous mental control of a wheelchair. Methods: In experiment 1 two subjects were asked to mentally drive both a real and a simulated wheelchair from a starting point to a goal along a pre-specified path. Here we only report experiments with the simulated wheelchair for which we have extensive data in a complex environment that allows a sound analysis. Each subject participated in five experimental sessions, each consisting of 10 trials. The time elapsed between two consecutive experimental sessions was variable (from 1 h to 2 months) to assess the system robustness over time. The pre-specified path was divided into seven stretches to assess the system robustness in different contexts. To further assess the performance of the brain-actuated wheelchair, subject 1 participated in a second experiment consisting of 10 trials where he was asked to drive the simulated wheelchair following 10 different complex and random paths never tried before. Results: In experiment 1 the two subjects were able to reach 100% (subject 1) and 80% (subject 2) of the final goals along the pre-specified trajectory in their best sessions. Different performances were obtained over time and path stretches, what indicates that performance is time and context dependent. In experiment 2, subject 1 was able to reach the final goal in 80% of the trials. Conclusions: The results show that subjects can rapidly master our asynchronous EEG-based BCI to control a wheelchair. Also, they can autonomously operate the BCI over long periods of time without the need for adaptive algorithms externally tuned by a human operator to minimize the impact of EEG non-stationarities. This is possible because of two key components: first, the inclusion of a shared control system between the BCI system and the intelligent simulated wheelchair; second, the selection of stable user-specific EEG features that maximize the separability between the mental tasks. Significance: These results show the feasibility of continuously controlling complex robotics devices using an asynchronous and noninvasive BCI.

This paper reviews several critical issues facing signal processing for brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) and suggests several recent approaches that should be further examined. The topics were selected based on discussions held during the 4th International BCI Meeting at a workshop organized to review and evaluate the current state of, and issues relevant to, feature extraction and translation of field potentials for BCIs. The topics presented in this paper include the relationship between electroencephalography and electrocorticography, novel features for performance prediction, time-embedded signal representations, phase information, signal non-stationarity, and unsupervised adaptation.

Abstract-In this paper we present further results of our asynchronous and non-invasive BMI for the continuous control of an intelligent wheelchair. Three subjects participated in two experiments where they steered the wheelchair spontaneously, without any external cue. To do so the users learn to voluntary modulate EEG oscillatory rhythms by executing three mental tasks (i.e., mental imagery) that are associated to different steering commands. Importantly, we implement shared control techniques between the BMI and the intelligent wheelchair to assist the subject in the driving task. The results show that the three subjects could achieve a significant level of mental control, even if far from optimal, to drive an intelligent wheelchair.

Abstract-The use of shared control techniques has a profound impact on the performance of a robotic assistant controlled by human brain signals. However, this shared control usually provides assistance to the user in a constant and identical manner each time. Creating an adaptive level of assistance, thereby complementing the user's capabilities at any moment, would be more appropriate. The better the user can do by himself, the less assistance he receives from the shared control system; and vice versa. In order to do this, we need to be able to detect when and in what way the user needs assistance. An appropriate assisting behaviour would then be activated for the time the user requires help, thereby adapting the level of assistance to the specific situation. This paper presents such a system, helping a brain-computer interface (BCI) subject perform goal-directed navigation of a simulated wheelchair in an adaptive manner. Whenever the subject has more difficulties in driving the wheelchair, more assistance will be given. Experimental results of two subjects show that this adaptive shared control increases the task performance. Also, it shows that a subject with a lower BCI performance has more need for extra assistance in difficult situations, such as manoeuvring in a narrow corridor.

What determines how we move in the world? Motor neuroscience often focusses either on intrinsic rhythmical properties of motor circuits or extrinsic sensorimotor feedback loops. Here we show that the interplay of both intrinsic and extrinsic dynamics is required to explain the intermittency observed in continuous tracking movements. Using spatiotemporal perturbations in humans, we demonstrate that apparently discrete submovements made 2–3 times per second reflect constructive interference between motor errors and continuous feedback corrections that are filtered by intrinsic circuitry in the motor system. Local field potentials in monkey motor cortex revealed characteristic signatures of a Kalman filter, giving rise to both low-frequency cortical cycles during movement, and delta oscillations during sleep. We interpret these results within the framework of optimal feedback control, and suggest that the intrinsic rhythmicity of motor cortical networks reflects an internal model of external dynamics, which is used for state estimation during feedback-guided movement.Editorial note: This article has been through an editorial process in which the authors decide how to respond to the issues raised during peer review. The Reviewing Editor's assessment is that all the issues have been addressed (<xref ref-type="decision-letter" rid="SA1">see decision letter</xref>).