What External Variables Affect Sensorimotor Rhythm Brain-Computer Interface (SMR-BCI) Performance?

Overview

Journal HCA Healthc J Med

Specialty Health Services

Date 2023 Jul 10

PMID 37427002

Authors

Alex J Horowitz

Christoph Guger

Milena Korostenskaja

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Description Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain-computer interfaces (SMR-BCIs) are used for the acquisition and translation of motor imagery-related brain signals into machine control commands, bypassing the usual central nervous system output. The selection of optimal external variable configuration can maximize SMR-BCI performance in both healthy and disabled people. This performance is especially important now when the BCI is targeted for everyday use in the environment beyond strictly regulated laboratory settings. In this review article, we summarize and critically evaluate the current body of knowledge pertaining to the effect of the external variables on SMR-BCI performance. When assessing the relationship between SMR-BCI performance and external variables, we broadly characterize them as elements that are less dependent on the BCI user and originate from beyond the user. These elements include such factors as BCI type, distractors, training, visual and auditory feedback, virtual reality and magneto electric feedback, proprioceptive and haptic feedback, carefulness of electroencephalography (EEG) system assembling and positioning of EEG electrodes as well as recording-related artifacts. At the end of this review paper, future developments are proposed regarding the research into the effects of external variables on SMR-BCI performance. We believe that our critical review will be of value for academic BCI scientists and developers and clinical professionals working in the field of BCIs as well as for SMR-BCI users.

Citing Articles

Considerations and discussions on the clear definition and definite scope of brain-computer interfaces.

Chen Y, Wang F, Li T, Zhao L, Gong A, Nan W Front Neurosci. 2024; 18:1449208.

PMID: 39161655 PMC: 11330831. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1449208.

Analyzing and computing humans by means of the brain using Brain-Computer Interfaces - understanding the user - previous evidence, self-relevance and the user's self-concept as potential superordinate human factors of relevance.

Herbert C Front Hum Neurosci. 2024; 17:1286895.

PMID: 38435127 PMC: 10904616. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1286895.

What Internal Variables Affect Sensorimotor Rhythm Brain-Computer Interface (SMR-BCI) Performance?.

Horowitz A, Guger C, Korostenskaja M HCA Healthc J Med. 2023; 2(3):163-179.

PMID: 37427003 PMC: 10324829. DOI: 10.36518/2689-0216.1196.

Competing at the Cybathlon championship for people with disabilities: long-term motor imagery brain-computer interface training of a cybathlete who has tetraplegia.

Korik A, McCreadie K, McShane N, Bois N, Khodadadzadeh M, Stow J J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022; 19(1):95.

PMID: 36068570 PMC: 9446658. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-022-01073-9.

References

Horowitz A, Guger C, Korostenskaja M . What Internal Variables Affect Sensorimotor Rhythm Brain-Computer Interface (SMR-BCI) Performance?. HCA Healthc J Med. 2023; 2(3):163-179. PMC: 10324829. DOI: 10.36518/2689-0216.1196. View

Monge-Pereira E, Ibanez-Pereda J, Alguacil-Diego I, Serrano J, Spottorno-Rubio M, Molina-Rueda F . Use of Electroencephalography Brain-Computer Interface Systems as a Rehabilitative Approach for Upper Limb Function After a Stroke: A Systematic Review. PM R. 2017; 9(9):918-932. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.04.016. View

McCreadie K, Coyle D, Prasad G . Learning to modulate sensorimotor rhythms with stereo auditory feedback for a brain-computer interface. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2013; 2012:6711-4. DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2012.6347534. View

Brumberg J, Pitt K, Burnison J . A Noninvasive Brain-Computer Interface for Real-Time Speech Synthesis: The Importance of Multimodal Feedback. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2018; 26(4):874-881. PMC: 5906041. DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2018.2808425. View

Zich C, Debener S, Kranczioch C, Bleichner M, Gutberlet I, De Vos M . Real-time EEG feedback during simultaneous EEG-fMRI identifies the cortical signature of motor imagery. Neuroimage. 2015; 114:438-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.04.020. View

Kapeller C, Hintermuller C, Abu-Alqumsan M, Pruckl R, Peer A, Guger C . A BCI using VEP for continuous control of a mobile robot. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2013; 2013:5254-7. DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2013.6610734. View

Bamdad M, Zarshenas H, Auais M . Application of BCI systems in neurorehabilitation: a scoping review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015; 10(5):355-64. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2014.961569. View

Pichiorri F, De Vico Fallani F, Cincotti F, Babiloni F, Molinari M, Kleih S . Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain-computer interface training: the impact on motor cortical responsiveness. J Neural Eng. 2011; 8(2):025020. DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/8/2/025020. View

Zhang Y, Zhang X, Sun H, Fan Z, Zhong X . Portable brain-computer interface based on novel convolutional neural network. Comput Biol Med. 2019; 107:248-256. DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2019.02.023. View

10.

Huang Q, Wu W, Chen X, Wu B, Wu L, Huang X . Evaluating the effect and mechanism of upper limb motor function recovery induced by immersive virtual-reality-based rehabilitation for subacute stroke subjects: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2019; 20(1):104. PMC: 6366030. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3177-y. View

11.

Vourvopoulos A, Jorge C, Abreu R, Figueiredo P, Fernandes J, Bermudez I Badia S . Efficacy and Brain Imaging Correlates of an Immersive Motor Imagery BCI-Driven VR System for Upper Limb Motor Rehabilitation: A Clinical Case Report. Front Hum Neurosci. 2019; 13:244. PMC: 6637378. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00244. View

12.

Shu X, Chen S, Meng J, Yao L, Sheng X, Jia J . Tactile Stimulation Improves Sensorimotor Rhythm-based BCI Performance in Stroke Patients. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2018; . DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2018.2882075. View

13.

Wang Z, Zhou Y, Chen L, Gu B, Liu S, Xu M . A BCI based visual-haptic neurofeedback training improves cortical activations and classification performance during motor imagery. J Neural Eng. 2019; 16(6):066012. DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ab377d. View

14.

Bowsher K, Civillico E, Coburn J, Collinger J, Contreras-Vidal J, Denison T . Brain-computer interface devices for patients with paralysis and amputation: a meeting report. J Neural Eng. 2016; 13(2):023001. DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/13/2/023001. View

15.

Angulo-Sherman I, Gutierrez D . A Link between the Increase in Electroencephalographic Coherence and Performance Improvement in Operating a Brain-Computer Interface. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2015; 2015:824175. PMC: 4531161. DOI: 10.1155/2015/824175. View

16.

Srinivasan R, Bibi F, Nunez P . Steady-state visual evoked potentials: distributed local sources and wave-like dynamics are sensitive to flicker frequency. Brain Topogr. 2006; 18(3):167-87. PMC: 1995016. DOI: 10.1007/s10548-006-0267-4. View

17.

Ono T, Kimura A, Ushiba J . Daily training with realistic visual feedback improves reproducibility of event-related desynchronisation following hand motor imagery. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013; 124(9):1779-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.03.006. View

18.

Spuler M . A high-speed brain-computer interface (BCI) using dry EEG electrodes. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2):e0172400. PMC: 5321409. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172400. View

19.

Ramos-Murguialday A, Schurholz M, Caggiano V, Wildgruber M, Caria A, Hammer E . Proprioceptive feedback and brain computer interface (BCI) based neuroprostheses. PLoS One. 2012; 7(10):e47048. PMC: 3465309. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047048. View

20.

Friedrich E, Scherer R, Sonnleitner K, Neuper C . Impact of auditory distraction on user performance in a brain-computer interface driven by different mental tasks. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011; 122(10):2003-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.03.019. View