Enhancing Performance and Bit Rates in a Brain–Computer Interface System With Phase-to-Amplitude Cross-Frequency Coupling: Evidences From Traditional c-VEP, Fast c-VEP, and SSVEP Designs

• Published in: Frontiers in neuroinformatics Vol. 12; p. 19
• Main Authors: Dimitriadis, Stavros I., Marimpis, Avraam D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland Frontiers Research Foundation 08.05.2018; Frontiers Media S.A
• Subjects: Accuracy; Brain research; brain–computer interface; c-VEP; Classification; cross-frequency coupling; disabled subjects; Muscles; Nerves; Neurological diseases; Neuroscience; Neurosciences; Psychology; SSVEP; Trends; Visual evoked potentials; Wheelchairs; United Kingdom > UK; performance; phase-to-amplitude coupling; cross-frequency coupling; disabled subjects; SSVEP; accuracy; brain–computer interface; c-VEP
• ISSN: 1662-5196; 1662-5196
• DOI: 10.3389/fninf.2018.00019

A brain-computer interface (BCI) is a channel of communication that transforms brain activity into specific commands for manipulating a personal computer or other home or electrical devices. In other words, a BCI is an alternative way of interacting with the environment by using brain activity instead of muscles and nerves. For that reason, BCI systems are of high clinical value for targeted populations suffering from neurological disorders. In this paper, we present a new processing approach in three publicly available BCI data sets: (a) a well-known multi-class ( = 6) coded-modulated Visual Evoked potential (c-VEP)-based BCI system for able-bodied and disabled subjects; (b) a multi-class ( = 32) c-VEP with slow and fast stimulus representation; and (c) a steady-state Visual Evoked potential (SSVEP) multi-class ( = 5) flickering BCI system. Estimating cross-frequency coupling (CFC) and namely δ-θ [δ: (0.5-4 Hz), θ: (4-8 Hz)] phase-to-amplitude coupling (PAC) within sensor and across experimental time, we succeeded in achieving high classification accuracy and Information Transfer Rates (ITR) in the three data sets. Our approach outperformed the originally presented ITR on the three data sets. The bit rates obtained for both the disabled and able-bodied subjects reached the fastest reported level of with the PAC estimator. Additionally, our approach outperformed alternative signal features such as the relative power (29.73 bits/min) and raw time series analysis (24.93 bits/min) and also the original reported bit rates of . In the second data set, we succeeded in achieving an average ITR of 124.40 ± 11.68 for the slow 60 Hz and an average ITR of 233.99 ± 15.75 for the fast 120 Hz. In the third data set, we succeeded in achieving an average ITR of 106.44 ± 8.94. Current methodology outperforms any previous methodologies applied to each of the three free available BCI datasets.