4.7 Article

Code-modulated visual evoked potentials using fast stimulus presentation and spatiotemporal beamformer decoding

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-15373-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Strategic Basic Research (SBO) grant - VLAIO (Flemish Agency for Innovation and Entrepreneurship)
  2. KU Leuven [PFV/10/008, IDO/12/007, IOF/HB/12/021]
  3. Belgian Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders [G088314N, G0A0914N]
  4. Inter-university Attraction Poles Programme - Belgian Science Policy [IUAP P7/11]
  5. Flemish Regional Ministry of Education (Belgium) [GOA 10/019]
  6. Hercules Foundation [AKUL 043]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When encoding visual targets using various lagged versions of a pseudorandom binary sequence of luminance changes, the EEG signal recorded over the viewer's occipital pole exhibits so-called codemodulated visual evoked potentials (cVEPs), the phase lags of which can be tied to these targets. The cVEP paradigm has enjoyed interest in the brain-computer interfacing (BCI) community for the reported high information transfer rates (ITR, in bits/min). In this study, we introduce a novel decoding algorithm based on spatiotemporal beamforming, and show that this algorithm is able to accurately identify the gazed target. Especially for a small number of repetitions of the coding sequence, our beamforming approach significantly outperforms an optimised support vector machine (SVM)-based classifier, which is considered state-of-the-art in cVEP-based BCI. In addition to the traditional 60 Hz stimulus presentation rate for the coding sequence, we also explore the 120 Hz rate, and show that the latter enables faster communication, with a maximal median ITR of 172.87 bits/min. Finally, we also report on a transition effect in the EEG signal following the onset of the stimulus sequence, and recommend to exclude the first 150 ms of the trials from decoding when relying on a single presentation of the stimulus sequence.

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

4.7
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