Next Article in Journal
Advances in Multimodal Emotion Recognition Based on Brain–Computer Interfaces
Next Article in Special Issue
A Comparison of Classification Techniques to Predict Brain-Computer Interfaces Accuracy Using Classifier-Based Latency Estimation
Previous Article in Journal
The Predictive Role of Executive Functions and Psychological Factors on Chronic Pain after Orthopaedic Surgery: A Longitudinal Cohort Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Deep Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Dentate Nucleus to Facilitate Standing Balance in Chronic Stroke Survivors—A Pilot Study
Article

Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces

Faculty of Technology and Bionics, Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences, 47533 Kleve, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2020, 10(10), 686; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10100686
Received: 20 August 2020 / Revised: 19 September 2020 / Accepted: 24 September 2020 / Published: 28 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Collection on Neural Engineering)
Motion-based visual evoked potentials (mVEP) is a new emerging trend in the field of steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP)-based brain–computer interfaces (BCI). In this paper, we introduce different movement-based stimulus patterns (steady-state motion visual evoked potentials—SSMVEP), without employing the typical flickering. The tested movement patterns for the visual stimuli included a pendulum-like movement, a flipping illusion, a checkerboard pulsation, checkerboard inverse arc pulsations, and reverse arc rotations, all with a spelling task consisting of 18 trials. In an online experiment with nine participants, the movement-based BCI systems were evaluated with an online four-target BCI-speller, in which each letter may be selected in three steps (three trials). For classification, the minimum energy combination and a filter bank approach were used. The following frequencies were utilized: 7.06 Hz, 7.50 Hz, 8.00 Hz, and 8.57 Hz, reaching an average accuracy between 97.22% and 100% and an average information transfer rate (ITR) between 15.42 bits/min and 33.92 bits/min. All participants successfully used the SSMVEP-based speller with all types of stimulation pattern. The most successful SSMVEP stimulus was the SSMVEP1 (pendulum-like movement), with the average results reaching 100% accuracy and 33.92 bits/min for the ITR. View Full-Text
Keywords: brain–computer interface (BCI); steady-state motion visual evoked potentials (SSMVEP); steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP); flicker-free steady-state motion visual evoked potentials (FFSSMVEP); motion visual evoked potentials (mVEP) brain–computer interface (BCI); steady-state motion visual evoked potentials (SSMVEP); steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP); flicker-free steady-state motion visual evoked potentials (FFSSMVEP); motion visual evoked potentials (mVEP)
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Stawicki, P.; Volosyak, I. Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10100686

AMA Style

Stawicki P, Volosyak I. Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces. Brain Sciences. 2020; 10(10):686. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10100686

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stawicki, Piotr, and Ivan Volosyak. 2020. "Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces" Brain Sciences 10, no. 10: 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10100686

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop