Cargando…

Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?

We present the evaluation of two well-known, low-cost consumer-grade EEG devices: the Emotiv EPOC and the Neurosky MindWave. Problems with using the consumer-grade EEG devices (BCI illiteracy, poor technical characteristics, and adverse EEG artefacts) are discussed. The experimental evaluation of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maskeliunas, Rytis, Damasevicius, Robertas, Martisius, Ignas, Vasiljevas, Mindaugas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4806709/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27014511
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1746
_version_ 1782423276865191936
author Maskeliunas, Rytis
Damasevicius, Robertas
Martisius, Ignas
Vasiljevas, Mindaugas
author_facet Maskeliunas, Rytis
Damasevicius, Robertas
Martisius, Ignas
Vasiljevas, Mindaugas
author_sort Maskeliunas, Rytis
collection PubMed
description We present the evaluation of two well-known, low-cost consumer-grade EEG devices: the Emotiv EPOC and the Neurosky MindWave. Problems with using the consumer-grade EEG devices (BCI illiteracy, poor technical characteristics, and adverse EEG artefacts) are discussed. The experimental evaluation of the devices, performed with 10 subjects asked to perform concentration/relaxation and blinking recognition tasks, is given. The results of statistical analysis show that both devices exhibit high variability and non-normality of attention and meditation data, which makes each of them difficult to use as an input to control tasks. BCI illiteracy may be a significant problem, as well as setting up of the proper environment of the experiment. The results of blinking recognition show that using the Neurosky device means recognition accuracy is less than 50%, while the Emotiv device has achieved a recognition accuracy of more than 75%; for tasks that require concentration and relaxation of subjects, the Emotiv EPOC device has performed better (as measured by the recognition accuracy) by ∼9%. Therefore, the Emotiv EPOC device may be more suitable for control tasks using the attention/meditation level or eye blinking than the Neurosky MindWave device.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4806709
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48067092016-03-24 Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks? Maskeliunas, Rytis Damasevicius, Robertas Martisius, Ignas Vasiljevas, Mindaugas PeerJ Neurology We present the evaluation of two well-known, low-cost consumer-grade EEG devices: the Emotiv EPOC and the Neurosky MindWave. Problems with using the consumer-grade EEG devices (BCI illiteracy, poor technical characteristics, and adverse EEG artefacts) are discussed. The experimental evaluation of the devices, performed with 10 subjects asked to perform concentration/relaxation and blinking recognition tasks, is given. The results of statistical analysis show that both devices exhibit high variability and non-normality of attention and meditation data, which makes each of them difficult to use as an input to control tasks. BCI illiteracy may be a significant problem, as well as setting up of the proper environment of the experiment. The results of blinking recognition show that using the Neurosky device means recognition accuracy is less than 50%, while the Emotiv device has achieved a recognition accuracy of more than 75%; for tasks that require concentration and relaxation of subjects, the Emotiv EPOC device has performed better (as measured by the recognition accuracy) by ∼9%. Therefore, the Emotiv EPOC device may be more suitable for control tasks using the attention/meditation level or eye blinking than the Neurosky MindWave device. PeerJ Inc. 2016-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4806709/ /pubmed/27014511 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1746 Text en ©2016 Maskeliunas et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Neurology
Maskeliunas, Rytis
Damasevicius, Robertas
Martisius, Ignas
Vasiljevas, Mindaugas
Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title_full Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title_fullStr Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title_full_unstemmed Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title_short Consumer-grade EEG devices: are they usable for control tasks?
title_sort consumer-grade eeg devices: are they usable for control tasks?
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4806709/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27014511
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1746
work_keys_str_mv AT maskeliunasrytis consumergradeeegdevicesaretheyusableforcontroltasks
AT damaseviciusrobertas consumergradeeegdevicesaretheyusableforcontroltasks
AT martisiusignas consumergradeeegdevicesaretheyusableforcontroltasks
AT vasiljevasmindaugas consumergradeeegdevicesaretheyusableforcontroltasks