Brain-computer interfaces based on the steady-state visual-evoked response

Middendorf, Matthew S.; McMillan, Grant R.; Calhoun, Gloria L.; Jones, Keith S.

doi:10.1109/86.847819

Cited by 606 publications

(351 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

317

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The considerable variety in SSVEP activity across subjects suggests that SSVEP BCIs should customize parameters used to translate SSVEP activity into control for each subject based on initial screening (e.g., Middendorf et al, 2000;Beverina et al, 2003). Figure 5 shows that the same frequencies that other subjects might use for control, 10 or 12 Hz, would not have allowed this subject to control a BCI.…”

Section: 2: Inter-subject Differences and Implications For Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, an SSVEP BCI can infer user intent by measuring EEG activity at a specific frequency or frequencies over occipital areas. Although SSVEP BCIs work with healthy subjects (e. g.., Middendorf et al, 2000;Cheng et al, 2002;Lalor et al, 2005) and subjects with moderate disabilities (Sutter et al, 1992 1 ;Wang et al, 2004), they have not been validated with subjects unable to control gaze.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SSVEP BCI articles typically note that subjects were told to shift gaze (Sutter et al, 1992;Middendorf et al, 2000;Cheng et al, 2002;Gao et al, 2003). Two BCI reviews (Kübler et al, 2001;Wolpaw et al, 2002) define SSVEP BCIs as "dependent" BCIs, meaning that they use EEG features that depend on muscle activity and thus would not work in patients without control over that activity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards an independent brain–computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials

Allison

McFarland

Schalk

et al. 2008

Clinical Neurophysiology

284

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-Brain -computer interface (BCI) systems using steady state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) have allowed healthy subjects to communicate. However, these systems may not work in severely disabled users because they may depend on gaze shifting. This study evaluates the hypothesis that overlapping stimuli can evoke changes in SSVEP activity sufficient to control a BCI. This would provide evidence that SSVEP BCIs could be used without shifting gaze.Methods-Subjects viewed a display containing two images that each oscillated at a different frequency. Different conditions used overlapping or non-overlapping images to explore dependence on gaze function. Subjects were asked to direct attention to one or the other of these images during each of twelve one-minute runs.Results-Half of the subjects produced differences in SSVEP activity elicited by overlapping stimuli that could support BCI control. In all remaining users, differences did exist at corresponding frequencies but were not strong enough to allow effective control.Conclusions-The data demonstrate that SSVEP differences sufficient for BCI control may be elicited by selective attention to one of two overlapping stimuli. Thus, some SSVEP-based BCI approaches may not depend on gaze control. The nature and extent of any BCI's dependence on muscle activity is a function of many factors, including the display, task, environment, and user.Significance-SSVEP BCIs might function in severely disabled users unable to reliably control gaze. Further research with these users is necessary to explore the optimal parameters of such a system and validate online performance in a home environment.

show abstract

Section: 2: Inter-subject Differences and Implications For Bcismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards an independent brain–computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials

Allison

McFarland

Schalk

et al. 2008

Clinical Neurophysiology

284

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SSVEPs are a response to attention by the user to a regularly oscillating visual stimuli (Calhoun et al, 1995(Calhoun et al, , 1997Jones et al, 1998;Ming et al, 1999;Middendorf et al, 2000). When attending to such a stimuli oscillatory activity at the corresponding frequency in the EEG recorded from the users occipital cortex increases in magnitude.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When attending to such a stimuli oscillatory activity at the corresponding frequency in the EEG recorded from the users occipital cortex increases in magnitude. Thus, by inspecting the power spectra of the EEG recorded over this region it is possible to discern which of a range of target stimuli the user is attending to (Middendorf et al, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the control of brain-computer interfaces by users with cerebral palsy

Daly

Billinger

Laparra-Hernández³

et al. 2013

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights1. We conduct a feasibility study with 14 individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) to evaluate their control of two online Brain-computer interfaces. 2. Eight of the individuals with CP were able to control at least one of the BCIs at a statistically significant level of accuracy. 3. Analysis of the results reveals that BCIs may be controlled by some individuals with CP. Abstract ObjectiveBrain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been proposed as a potential assistive device for individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) to assist with their communication needs. However, it is unclear how well-suited BCIs are to individuals with CP. Therefore, this study aims to investigate to what extent these users are able to gain control of BCIs. MethodsThis study is conducted with 14 individuals with CP attempting to control two standard online BCIs (1) based upon sensorimotor rhythm modulations, and (2) based upon steady state visual evoked potentials.Email address: reinhold.scherer@tugraz.at (Reinhold Scherer*) Preprint submitted to Clinical NeurophysiologyMarch 27, 2013 ResultsOf the 14 users, 8 are able to use one or other of the BCIs, online, with a statistically significant level of accuracy, without prior training. Classification results are driven by neurophysiological activity and not seen to correlate with occurrences of artifacts. However, many of these users' accuracies, while statistically significant, would require either more training or more advanced methods before practical BCI control would be possible. ConclusionsThe results indicate that BCIs may be controlled by individuals with CP but that many issues need to be overcome before practical application use may be achieved. SignificanceThis is the first study to assess the ability of a large group of different individuals with CP to gain control of an online BCI system. The results indicate that six users could control a sensorimotor rhythm BCI and three a steady state visual evoked potential BCI at statistically significant levels of accuracy (SMR accuracies; mean ± STD, 0.821 ± 0.116, SSVEP accuracies; 0.422 ± 0.069).

show abstract

Event‐Related Potentials

Sanei

Chambers²

2007

EEG Signal Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brain-computer interfaces based on the steady-state visual-evoked response

Cited by 606 publications

References 4 publications

Towards an independent brain–computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials

Towards an independent brain–computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials

On the control of brain-computer interfaces by users with cerebral palsy

Event‐Related Potentials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About