| Literature DB >> 28893295 |
Kun Wang1,2, Zhongpeng Wang1,2, Yi Guo1,2, Feng He1,2, Hongzhi Qi3,4, Minpeng Xu1,2, Dong Ming5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motor imagery (MI) induced EEG patterns are widely used as control signals for brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Kinetic and kinematic factors have been proved to be able to change EEG patterns during motor execution and motor imagery. However, to our knowledge, there is still no literature reporting an effective online MI-BCI using kinetic factor regulated EEG oscillations. This study proposed a novel MI-BCI paradigm in which users can online output multiple commands by imagining clenching their right hand with different force loads.Entities:
Keywords: Brain-computer Interface (BCI); Electroencephalogram (EEG); Event-related Desynchronization (ERD); Force load; Motor imagery
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28893295 PMCID: PMC5594542 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0307-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil ISSN: 1743-0003 Impact factor: 4.262
Fig. 1The timeline of one trial of the experimental paradigm. Sessions 1, 2 and 3 have two tasks, high force load and low force load. Each trial has a motor execution task followed by a motor imagery task at the same force load. There were two blocks during these sessions and each block included 10 trials (5 trials of high and 5 trials of low, randomly sorted). Session 4 has only one task, relaxed (30 trials). Session 5 has three tasks (high, low and relaxed). It consisted of four blocks, each of which included 12 trials (4 trials for high, 4 trials for low and 4 trials for relaxed, randomly sorted). Sessions 2, 3 and 5 present a voice feedback after each motor imagery task to indicate whether the classifier correctly identified the imagery force load level
Fig. 2Examples of the EMG signals for one representative subject and the comparison of IEMG values. a The EMG signals of one subject during seven experimental tasks. b The comparison of IEMG values between RX task and other tasks. MEH and MEL show significant differences compared to relaxed tasks, while other tasks, motor imagery tasks, show minimal differences
Fig. 3Classification performance. a Classification accuracies for each subject during the experiment (each color represented one subject). Session 1 to 3 identify two classifications, ‘high’ versus ‘low’, while session 5 identifies three classifications, ‘high’ versus ‘low’ versus ‘relaxed’. b Online output distribution in session 5
Fig. 4Time-frequency analysis of EEG for different mental tasks. a The averaged time-frequency maps on C3 under multiple force load motor imagery tasks. The vertical line was marked at the onset of task, the blue color indicates the ERD phenomenon. b The mean ERSP on C3 at mu and beta rhythms during two stages of the experiment. c The averaged ERSP topography under multiple force load motor imagery tasks. d The significant difference topography between the high force load MI and low force load MI