4.6 Article

EEG Activity During Movement Planning Encodes Upcoming Peak Speed and Acceleration and Improves the Accuracy in Predicting Hand Kinematics

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JBHI.2014.2327635

关键词

Alpha and beta band powers; EEG; movement execution; movement planning; peak speed and acceleration.

资金

  1. NSF (EFRI M3C) [SMA-1041755, ENG-1137279]
  2. ONR MURI [N00014-10-1-0072]
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities [1137279] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The relationship between movement kinematics and human brain activity is an important and fundamental question for the development of neural prosthesis. The peak velocity and the peak acceleration could best reflect the feedforward-type movement; thus, it is worthwhile to investigate them further. Most related studies focused on the correlation between kinematics and brain activity during the movement execution or imagery. However, human movement is the result of the motor planning phase as well as the execution phase and researchers have demonstrated that statistical correlations exist between EEG activity during the motor planning and the peak velocity and the peak acceleration using grand-average analysis. In this paper, we examined whether the correlations were concealed in trial-to-trial decoding from the low signal-to-noise ratio of EEG activity. The alpha and beta powers from the movement planning phase were combined with the alpha and beta powers from the movement execution phase to predict the peak tangential speed and acceleration. The results showed that EEG activity from the motor planning phase could also predict the peak speed and the peak acceleration with a reasonable accuracy. Furthermore, the decoding accuracy of the peak speed and the peak acceleration could both be improved by combining band powers from the motor planning phase with the band powers from the movement execution.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据