2022
DOI: 10.3390/su142113844
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the Visual Guidance of Motor Imagery in Sustainable Brain–Computer Interfaces

Abstract: Motor imagery brain–computer interface (MI-BCI) systems hold the possibility of restoring motor function and also offer the possibility of sustainable autonomous living for individuals with various motor and sensory impairments. When utilizing the MI-BCI, the user’s performance impacts the system’s overall accuracy, and concentrating on the user’s mental load enables a better evaluation of the system’s overall performance. The impacts of various levels of abstraction on visual guidance of mental training in mo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 51 publications
(84 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They are different in timings, movements that are imagined differ (movements right and up for Dataset 1 and elbow extension and flexion for Dataset 2) and paradigm of Dataset 1 contains vibrotactile guidance on certain trials, which kept the participants more engaged with the task. Another reason could be the positive effect of visual guidance (Dataset 1) in comparison to visual cue only (Dataset 2) [ 49 ]. One more reason for different performance could be the different electrode positions availability described in “ Dataset 2 ” section.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are different in timings, movements that are imagined differ (movements right and up for Dataset 1 and elbow extension and flexion for Dataset 2) and paradigm of Dataset 1 contains vibrotactile guidance on certain trials, which kept the participants more engaged with the task. Another reason could be the positive effect of visual guidance (Dataset 1) in comparison to visual cue only (Dataset 2) [ 49 ]. One more reason for different performance could be the different electrode positions availability described in “ Dataset 2 ” section.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%