Cargando…

Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study

Even with state-of-the-art techniques there are individuals whose paralysis prevents them from communicating with others. Brain–Computer-Interfaces (BCI) aim to utilize brain waves to construct a voice for those whose needs remain unmet. In this paper we compare the efficacy of a BCI input signal, c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nezamfar, Hooman, Mohseni Salehi, Seyed Sadegh, Higger, Matt, Erdogmus, Deniz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6071120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29986504
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8070130
_version_ 1783343811784605696
author Nezamfar, Hooman
Mohseni Salehi, Seyed Sadegh
Higger, Matt
Erdogmus, Deniz
author_facet Nezamfar, Hooman
Mohseni Salehi, Seyed Sadegh
Higger, Matt
Erdogmus, Deniz
author_sort Nezamfar, Hooman
collection PubMed
description Even with state-of-the-art techniques there are individuals whose paralysis prevents them from communicating with others. Brain–Computer-Interfaces (BCI) aim to utilize brain waves to construct a voice for those whose needs remain unmet. In this paper we compare the efficacy of a BCI input signal, code-VEP via Electroencephalography, against eye gaze tracking, among the most popular modalities used. These results, on healthy individuals without paralysis, suggest that while eye tracking works well for some, it does not work well or at all for others; the latter group includes individuals with corrected vision or those who squint their eyes unintentionally while focusing on a task. It is also evident that the performance of the interface is more sensitive to head/body movements when eye tracking is used as the input modality, compared to using c-VEP. Sensitivity to head/body movement could be better in eye tracking systems which are tracking the head or mounted on the face and are designed specifically as assistive devices. The sample interface developed for this assessment has the same reaction time when driven with c-VEP or with eye tracking; approximately 0.5–1 second is needed to make a selection among the four options simultaneously presented. Factors, such as system reaction time and robustness play a crucial role in participant preferences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6071120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60711202018-08-09 Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study Nezamfar, Hooman Mohseni Salehi, Seyed Sadegh Higger, Matt Erdogmus, Deniz Brain Sci Article Even with state-of-the-art techniques there are individuals whose paralysis prevents them from communicating with others. Brain–Computer-Interfaces (BCI) aim to utilize brain waves to construct a voice for those whose needs remain unmet. In this paper we compare the efficacy of a BCI input signal, code-VEP via Electroencephalography, against eye gaze tracking, among the most popular modalities used. These results, on healthy individuals without paralysis, suggest that while eye tracking works well for some, it does not work well or at all for others; the latter group includes individuals with corrected vision or those who squint their eyes unintentionally while focusing on a task. It is also evident that the performance of the interface is more sensitive to head/body movements when eye tracking is used as the input modality, compared to using c-VEP. Sensitivity to head/body movement could be better in eye tracking systems which are tracking the head or mounted on the face and are designed specifically as assistive devices. The sample interface developed for this assessment has the same reaction time when driven with c-VEP or with eye tracking; approximately 0.5–1 second is needed to make a selection among the four options simultaneously presented. Factors, such as system reaction time and robustness play a crucial role in participant preferences. MDPI 2018-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6071120/ /pubmed/29986504 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8070130 Text en © 2018 by the authors. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Nezamfar, Hooman
Mohseni Salehi, Seyed Sadegh
Higger, Matt
Erdogmus, Deniz
Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title_full Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title_fullStr Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title_full_unstemmed Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title_short Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study
title_sort code-vep vs. eye tracking: a comparison study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6071120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29986504
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8070130
work_keys_str_mv AT nezamfarhooman codevepvseyetrackingacomparisonstudy
AT mohsenisalehiseyedsadegh codevepvseyetrackingacomparisonstudy
AT higgermatt codevepvseyetrackingacomparisonstudy
AT erdogmusdeniz codevepvseyetrackingacomparisonstudy