| Literature DB >> 32908470 |
Koun-Tem Sun1, Kai-Lung Hsieh1, Syuan-Rong Syu1.
Abstract
This study proposes a home care system (HCS) based on a brain-computer interface (BCI) with a smartphone. The HCS provides daily help to motor-disabled people when a caregiver is not present. The aim of the study is two-fold: (1) to develop a BCI-based home care system to help end-users control their household appliances, and (2) to assess whether the architecture of the HCS is easy for motor-disabled people to use. A motion-strip is used to evoke event-related potentials (ERPs) in the brain of the user, and the system immediately processes these potentials to decode the user's intentions. The system, then, translates these intentions into application commands and sends them via Bluetooth to the user's smartphone to make an emergency call or to execute the corresponding app to emit an infrared (IR) signal to control a household appliance. Fifteen healthy and seven motor-disabled subjects (including the one with ALS) participated in the experiment. The average online accuracy was 81.8% and 78.1%, respectively. Using component N2P3 to discriminate targets from nontargets can increase the efficiency of the system. Results showed that the system allows end-users to use smartphone apps as long as they are using their brain waves. More important, only one electrode O1 is required to measure EEG signals, giving the system good practical usability. The HCS can, thus, improve the autonomy and self-reliance of its end-users.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32908470 PMCID: PMC7474741 DOI: 10.1155/2020/1843269
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Recent studies of BCI-based systems implemented in real-world scenarios.
| Study | Main function | Stimulation modality | Electrodes | Subjects | Accuracy (%) | Bit rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Speller | ERP: motion-onset-P300 | Fz, Cz, Pz, Oz, P7, and P8 | 10 CS | N2-91.5, P3-72.4 | N2-15.91, P3-12.84 |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Chinese speller | ERP: motion-onset-N2P3 | F3, F4, C3, C4, P3, P4, O1, O2, Fz, Cz, and Pz | 7 CS | 80% using O1 only | 27.8 |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Speller | ERP + SSVER RC paradigm | Cz, Pz, P3, P4, O1, O2, POz, PO7, and PO8 | 14 CS | After 8 trials: >95 | 53.6 |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Robot control | ERP: motion-onset-N2P3 | O1 | 12 CS | 80% using O1 only | 353.33 s for 26.33 comm. |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Robot control | EOG + EEG: flash on eight direct | Fz, Cz, Pz, Oz, P7, P3, P4, and P8 | 13 CS | After 5 trials:>99.04 | — |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Speller | ERP + SSVER RC paradigm | Fz, Cz, Pz, P3, P4, PO7, PO8, POz, Oz, O1, and O2 | 13 CS | 95.18 for hybrid | 50.41 for hybrid |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Healthcare BCI syst. | ERP + SSVER RC paradigm | Cz, Pz, O1, O2, and Oz | 5 CS | ERP: 95.5SSVER:93 | — |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Environmental control | ERP-P300RC paradigm | Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz, P7, P3, Pz, P4, P8, O1, Oz, and O2 | 6 MDS, 2 CS | 89.6 | 734.3 s for 30 comm. |
|
| ||||||
| [ | Use of social networks | ERP-P300 RC paradigm | Fz, Cz, Pz, P3, P4, PO7, PO8, and Oz | 18 MDS, 10 CS | 80.6 for MDS, 92.3 for CS | 1.47 OCM for MDS, 2.06 for CS |
RC paradigm: the row-col paradigm; “N” indicates the number of subjects; “CS” stands for control abled subjects; “N2” stands for N200 evoked potential; “P3” stands for P300 evoked potential.
Figure 1A waveform showing several ERP components, including the N200 (labelled N2) and P300 (labelled P3). Note that the ERP is plotted with negative voltages at the top, a common, but not universal, practice in ERP research [38].
Clinical data of the motor-disabled participants.
| Subject | Age | Gender | DD | Disease |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE1 | 35 | M | Moderate | Spinal cord injury |
| SE2 | 37 | M | Moderate | Tetraplegia |
| SE3 | 46 | M | Moderate | Spinal cord injury |
| SE4 | 42 | M | Mild | Spinal cord injury |
| SE5 | 39 | M | Moderate | Spinal cord injury |
| SE6 | 43 | M | Mild | Spinal cord injury |
| SE7 | 50 | M | Marked | ALS |
Figure 2System architecture of the proposed HCS, including the ERP-based vBCI system and its applications.
Figure 3Four GUIs in the BCI module. (a) Main screen with four options; (b) TV control screen with six options; (c) air conditioner control screen with six options; and (d) TV channel shift screen with 12 options.
Figure 4The caregiver GUIs of the ICAI1101 smartphone app: (a) main app screen on the smartphone; (b) TV remote controller; (c) air conditioner remote controller; and (d) TV channel shift screen.
Figure 5A stimulation schematic of one trial for the four options on the main screen. There are six instances of stimulation for every option in a single trial.
Figure 6The ERPs of four options on the main screen from the output of the first trial of SE3. The red circle indicates the potential of N200, while the green circle represents the potential of P300.
Figure 7Flowchart of the vBCI operating procedures. The solid arrow line shows that the system sends an instruction to switch the screen of the system to the target GUI. The dotted arrow line shows that the system is only sending a command to do something, and the screen remains on the same GUI.
Details of the 15 trial sequences.
| Step | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GUI | Main screen | TV screen | TV screen | TV screen | TV channel shift | TV channel shift | TV channel shift | TV screen | Main screen | Air condi. | Air condi. | Air condi. | Air condi. | Main screen | Main screen |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Option to choose | Enter TV | Volume up | Next channel | Enter channel shift | Choose channel 1 | Choose OK | Back TV | Back to main | To air condi. | Turn on AC | Temp down | Air Flow | Back to main | Emergency call | System off |
Figure 8Two ERP samples from one motor-disabled subject. (a) The ERPs from the main screen of the BCI system (4 options); (b) the ERPs from TV control screen of the BCI system (6 options).
The ERP values (µV) of all options in the main screen obtained from the first trial of subject E14.
| Options | N200 | P300 | N2P3 | Result | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Online | Offline | ||||
| TV | −1.7969 | 2.2845 | 4.0814 | ✓ | N200, N2P3 |
| AC | 0.6518 | 3.5418 | 2.8900 | P300 | |
| EC | 0.0030 | 1.0302 | 1.0272 | ||
| Off | −1.7847 | −0.9263 | 0.8584 | ||
The ERP values (µV) of all options in the main screen obtained from the 3rd trial of subject SE1.
| Options | N200 | P300 | N2P3 | Result | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Online | Offline | ||||
| Next channel | −1.6458 | 2.7013 | 4.3471 | ✓ | N200, N2P3 |
| Channel shift | −0.3196 | 2.5717 | 2.8913 | ||
| Volume up | 0.9145 | 3.0962 | 2.1817 | P300 | |
| Prev. channel | −0.5131 | 1.4089 | 1.9220 | ||
| Main screen | 0.8788 | 1.0479 | 0.1691 | ||
| Volume down | 1.3293 | 1.1093 | −0.2200 | ||
Figure 9The accuracy levels and bit rate attained by all 15 healthy subjects.
Figure 10This bar chart summarizes the number of correct selections for each healthy subject for each trial. For example, if the system uses N2P3 to interpret the EEG, the choices from 14 of all 15 users are correct in the first trial, while N200 13 are correct, and only 10 are correct for P300.
Paired-sample t-test results of all trials for the 15 healthy subjects. α = 0.01, N = 225.
| Case |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| N200 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | 0.747 | 0.467 |
| P300 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | 6.225 | 0.000 |
| N2P3 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | 8.998 | 0.000 |
| N2P3 vs. P300 | N2P3-targeted vs. P300-targeted | 2.276 | 0.039 |
p < 0.05; p < 0.01; p < 0.001.
Figure 11Accuracy levels and bit rate attained by all motor-disabled subjects (including one ALS, SE7).
Figure 12This chart summarizes the correct selections of all motor-disabled subjects for each trial. For example, if the system uses N2P3 to interpret the EEG, the choices from 7 of 7 users are correct in the first trial, while 4 are correct with N200 and 5 with P300.
Paired-sample t-test results of all trials for the seven motor-disabled subjects. α = 0.01, N = 105.
| Case |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| N200 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | −4.509 | 0.004 |
| P300 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | 0.346 | 0.741 |
| N2P3 | Targeted vs. nontargeted | 6.953 | 0.000 |
p < 0.01; p < 0.001.
Independent-sample t-test of the accuracy of the healthy subjects and of the motor-disabled subjects, α = 0.01.
| Case |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N200 targeted | Healthy vs. disabled | 0.1596 | 3.1693 | 0.0048 |
|
| ||||
| P300 targeted | Healthy vs. disabled | 0.2428 | 2.9396 | 0.0081 |
|
| ||||
| N2P3 targeted | Healthy vs. disabled | 0.2817 | 0.6258 | 0.5385 |
|
| ||||
| Bit rate | Healthy vs. disabled | 0.2576 | 0.8793 | 0.3897 |
p < 0.01; p < 0.001.