2015
DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/12/6/066009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Increasing session-to-session transfer in a brain–computer interface with on-site background noise acquisition

Abstract: We inferred from our results that, with an on-site background noise suppression feature extractor and pre-existing training data, further training time may be unnecessary.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the online task, the subjects received feedback from a 2 s EEG signal window after they began to imagine limb movement. Each subject performed the online MI task in 75 trials per class [26].…”
Section: Data Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the online task, the subjects received feedback from a 2 s EEG signal window after they began to imagine limb movement. Each subject performed the online MI task in 75 trials per class [26].…”
Section: Data Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They were down-sampled by 4 and a time window of 0-2 s after imagination onset was used for analysis. Feature extraction (invariant common spatio-spectral pattern [26,27]) and binary classification (Fisher's linear discriminant analysis (FLDA) [28]) of these data were applied to each pair of classes. Thus, three classifiers were generated with 3-class MI.…”
Section: Motor Imagery Task Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Even though regularization is of specific importance for ill-posed problems such as source reconstruction (Tian et al, 2013), less underdetermined problems can also profit. For CSP, a broad bandwidth of regularization approaches has been published, such as L1-and L2-norm penalties (Wang and Li, 2016;Lotte and Guan, 2011;Arvaneh et al, 2011;Farquhar et al, 2006), regularized transfer learning strategies that accumulate information across multiple sessions and subjects (Cheng et al, 2017;Devlaminck et al, 2011;Samek et al, 2013;Kang et al, 2009;Lotte and Guan, 2010) and variants which favor invariant solutions across sessions/runs under EEG non-stationarities (Arvaneh et al, 2013;Samek et al, 2012Samek et al, , 2014Cho et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To classify MI EEG signals, a variety of machine learning algorithms have appeared in the literature [17]; they include support vector machine (SVM) [18], linear discriminant analysis (LDA) [19,20], and restricted Boltzmann machines (RBM) [21]. The deep neural network (DNN) approach has recently shown excellent classification performance in this field.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%