Cargando…

Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs

For Brain-Computer interfaces (BCIs), system calibration is a lengthy but necessary process for successful operation. Co-adaptive BCIs aim to shorten training and imply positive motivation to users by presenting feedback already at early stages: After just 5 min of gathering calibration data, the sy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwarz, Andreas, Brandstetter, Julia, Pereira, Joana, Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6828633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31522355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02047-1
_version_ 1783465391006154752
author Schwarz, Andreas
Brandstetter, Julia
Pereira, Joana
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
author_facet Schwarz, Andreas
Brandstetter, Julia
Pereira, Joana
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
author_sort Schwarz, Andreas
collection PubMed
description For Brain-Computer interfaces (BCIs), system calibration is a lengthy but necessary process for successful operation. Co-adaptive BCIs aim to shorten training and imply positive motivation to users by presenting feedback already at early stages: After just 5 min of gathering calibration data, the systems are able to provide feedback and engage users in a mutual learning process. In this work, we investigate whether the retraining stage of co-adaptive BCIs can be adapted to a semi-supervised concept, where only a small amount of labeled data is available and all additional data needs to be labeled by the BCI itself. The aim of the current work was to evaluate whether a semi-supervised co-adaptive BCI could successfully compete with a supervised co-adaptive BCI model. In a supporting two-class (190 trials per condition) BCI study based on motor imagery tasks, we evaluated both approaches in two separate groups of 10 participants online, while we simulated the other approach in each group offline. Our results indicate that despite the lack of true labeled data, the semi-supervised driven BCI did not perform significantly worse (p > 0.05) than the supervised counterpart. We believe that these findings contribute to developing BCIs for long-term use, where continuous adaptation becomes imperative for maintaining meaningful BCI performance. [Figure: see text] ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11517-019-02047-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6828633
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68286332019-11-18 Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs Schwarz, Andreas Brandstetter, Julia Pereira, Joana Müller-Putz, Gernot R. Med Biol Eng Comput Original Article For Brain-Computer interfaces (BCIs), system calibration is a lengthy but necessary process for successful operation. Co-adaptive BCIs aim to shorten training and imply positive motivation to users by presenting feedback already at early stages: After just 5 min of gathering calibration data, the systems are able to provide feedback and engage users in a mutual learning process. In this work, we investigate whether the retraining stage of co-adaptive BCIs can be adapted to a semi-supervised concept, where only a small amount of labeled data is available and all additional data needs to be labeled by the BCI itself. The aim of the current work was to evaluate whether a semi-supervised co-adaptive BCI could successfully compete with a supervised co-adaptive BCI model. In a supporting two-class (190 trials per condition) BCI study based on motor imagery tasks, we evaluated both approaches in two separate groups of 10 participants online, while we simulated the other approach in each group offline. Our results indicate that despite the lack of true labeled data, the semi-supervised driven BCI did not perform significantly worse (p > 0.05) than the supervised counterpart. We believe that these findings contribute to developing BCIs for long-term use, where continuous adaptation becomes imperative for maintaining meaningful BCI performance. [Figure: see text] ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11517-019-02047-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-09-14 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6828633/ /pubmed/31522355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02047-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Schwarz, Andreas
Brandstetter, Julia
Pereira, Joana
Müller-Putz, Gernot R.
Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title_full Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title_fullStr Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title_full_unstemmed Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title_short Direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive BCIs
title_sort direct comparison of supervised and semi-supervised retraining approaches for co-adaptive bcis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6828633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31522355
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02047-1
work_keys_str_mv AT schwarzandreas directcomparisonofsupervisedandsemisupervisedretrainingapproachesforcoadaptivebcis
AT brandstetterjulia directcomparisonofsupervisedandsemisupervisedretrainingapproachesforcoadaptivebcis
AT pereirajoana directcomparisonofsupervisedandsemisupervisedretrainingapproachesforcoadaptivebcis
AT mullerputzgernotr directcomparisonofsupervisedandsemisupervisedretrainingapproachesforcoadaptivebcis