Utilizing secondary input from passive brain-computer interfaces for enhancing human-machine interaction

40Citations
Citations of this article
75Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) directly translates patterns of brain activity to input for controlling a machine. The introduction of methods from statistical machine learning [1] to the field of brain-computer interfacing (BCI) had a deep impact on classification accuracy. It also minimized the effort needed to build up the skill of controlling a BCI system [2]. This enabled other fields of research to adapt methods from BCI research for their own purposes [3, 4]. Team PhyPA, the research group for physiological parameters of the chair for Human-Machine Systems (HMS) of the Technical University of Berlin, focuses on enabling new communication channels for HMS. Especially the use of passive BCIs (pBCI) [3, 4], not dependent on any intended action of the user, show a high potential for enhancing the interaction in HMS [5]. Additionally, as actual classification rates are still below the threshold for efficient primary control [6, 7] in HMS, we focus on establishing a secondary, BCI-based communication channel. This kind of interaction does not necessarily disturb the primary mode of interaction, providing a low usage cost and hence an efficient way of enhancement. We have designed several applications following this approach. Here we are going to present briefly the results from two studies, which show the capabilities arising from the use of passive and secondary BCI interaction. First, we show that a pBCI can be utilized to gain valuable information about HMSs, which are hard to detect by exogeneous factors. By mimicking a typical BCI interaction, we have been able to identify and isolate a factor inducing non-stationarities with a deep impact on the feature dynamics. The retained information can be utilized for automatically triggered classifier adaptation. And second, we show that pBCIs are indeed capable to enhance common HMS interaction outside the laboratory. With this, we would like to feed back our experiences made with the use of BCIs for HMS. We hope to povide new and useful information about brain dynamics which might be helpful for ongoing research in augmented cognition. © 2009 Springer.

References Powered by Scopus

Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control

6566Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: Basic principles

5751Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation

2825Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

EEGNet: A compact convolutional neural network for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces

2654Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Progress in Brain Computer Interface: Challenges and Opportunities

221Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Learning from EEG error-related potentials in noninvasive brain-computer interfaces

213Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zander, T. O., Kothe, C., Welke, S., & Roetting, M. (2009). Utilizing secondary input from passive brain-computer interfaces for enhancing human-machine interaction. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 5638 LNAI, pp. 759–771). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02812-0_86

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 43

78%

Researcher 9

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 24

44%

Computer Science 23

42%

Neuroscience 5

9%

Psychology 3

5%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free