Cargando…

Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?

In this study, across-participant and across-session transfer learning was investigated to minimize the calibration time of the brain–computer interface (BCI) system in the context of continuous hand trajectory decoding. We reanalyzed data from a study with 10 able-bodied participants across three s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Srisrisawang, Nitikorn, Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10098869/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37050653
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23073593
_version_ 1785024917798912000
author Srisrisawang, Nitikorn
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
author_facet Srisrisawang, Nitikorn
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
author_sort Srisrisawang, Nitikorn
collection PubMed
description In this study, across-participant and across-session transfer learning was investigated to minimize the calibration time of the brain–computer interface (BCI) system in the context of continuous hand trajectory decoding. We reanalyzed data from a study with 10 able-bodied participants across three sessions. A leave-one-participant-out (LOPO) model was utilized as a starting model. Recursive exponentially weighted partial least squares regression (REW-PLS) was employed to overcome the memory limitation due to the large pool of training data. We considered four scenarios: generalized with no update (Gen), generalized with cumulative update (GenC), and individual models with cumulative (IndC) and non-cumulative (Ind) updates, with each one trained with sensor-space features or source-space features. The decoding performance in generalized models (Gen and GenC) was lower than the chance level. In individual models, the cumulative update (IndC) showed no significant improvement over the non-cumulative model (Ind). The performance showed the decoder’s incapability to generalize across participants and sessions in this task. The results suggested that the best correlation could be achieved with the sensor-space individual model, despite additional anatomical information in the source-space features. The decoding pattern showed a more localized pattern around the precuneus over three sessions in Ind models.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10098869
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100988692023-04-14 Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space? Srisrisawang, Nitikorn Müller-Putz, Gernot R. Sensors (Basel) Article In this study, across-participant and across-session transfer learning was investigated to minimize the calibration time of the brain–computer interface (BCI) system in the context of continuous hand trajectory decoding. We reanalyzed data from a study with 10 able-bodied participants across three sessions. A leave-one-participant-out (LOPO) model was utilized as a starting model. Recursive exponentially weighted partial least squares regression (REW-PLS) was employed to overcome the memory limitation due to the large pool of training data. We considered four scenarios: generalized with no update (Gen), generalized with cumulative update (GenC), and individual models with cumulative (IndC) and non-cumulative (Ind) updates, with each one trained with sensor-space features or source-space features. The decoding performance in generalized models (Gen and GenC) was lower than the chance level. In individual models, the cumulative update (IndC) showed no significant improvement over the non-cumulative model (Ind). The performance showed the decoder’s incapability to generalize across participants and sessions in this task. The results suggested that the best correlation could be achieved with the sensor-space individual model, despite additional anatomical information in the source-space features. The decoding pattern showed a more localized pattern around the precuneus over three sessions in Ind models. MDPI 2023-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10098869/ /pubmed/37050653 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23073593 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Srisrisawang, Nitikorn
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title_full Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title_fullStr Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title_full_unstemmed Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title_short Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
title_sort transfer learning in trajectory decoding: sensor or source space?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10098869/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37050653
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23073593
work_keys_str_mv AT srisrisawangnitikorn transferlearningintrajectorydecodingsensororsourcespace
AT mullerputzgernotr transferlearningintrajectorydecodingsensororsourcespace