16.11.2012 Views

Brain–Computer Interfaces - Index of

Brain–Computer Interfaces - Index of

Brain–Computer Interfaces - Index of

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

BCIs in the Laboratory and at Home: The Wadsworth Research Program 103<br />

3 P300-Based Item Selection<br />

We have also been developing a BCI system based on the P300 event-related potential.<br />

Farwell and Donchin [17] first introduced the BCI paradigm in which the user<br />

is presented with a 6 × 6 matrix containing 36 symbols. The user focuses attention<br />

on a symbol he/she wishes to select while the rows and columns <strong>of</strong> the matrix are<br />

highlighted in a random sequence <strong>of</strong> flashes. Each time the desired symbol flashes,<br />

a P300 response occurs. To identify the desired symbol, the classifier (typically<br />

based on a stepwise linear discriminant analysis (SWLDA)) determines the row and<br />

the column to which the user is attending (i.e., the symbol that elicits a P300) by<br />

weighting and combining specific spatiotemporal features that are time-locked to<br />

the stimulus. The classifier determines the row and the column that produced the<br />

largest discriminant values and the intersection <strong>of</strong> this row and column defines the<br />

selected symbol. Figure 6 shows a 6 × 6 P300 matrix display and the average eventrelated<br />

potential responses to the flashing <strong>of</strong> each symbol. The letter O was the<br />

target symbol, and it elicited the largest P300 response. The other characters in the<br />

row and the column containing the O elicited a smaller P300 because these symbols<br />

flashed each time the O flashed.<br />

The focus <strong>of</strong> our P300 laboratory studies has been on improving classification<br />

accuracy. We have examined variables related to stimulus properties and presentation<br />

rate [47], classification methods [21], and classification parameters [22]. Sellers<br />

et al. [47] examined the effects <strong>of</strong> inter-stimulus interval (ISI) and matrix size on<br />

classification accuracy using two ISIs (175- and 350-ms) , and two matrices (3 × 3<br />

Fig. 6 (A)A6× 6 P300 matrix display. The rows and columns are randomly highlighted as shown<br />

for column 3. (B) Average waveforms at electrode Pz for each <strong>of</strong> the 36 symbols in the matrix. The<br />

target letter “O” (thick waveform) elicited the largest P300 response, and a smaller P300 response<br />

is evident for the other symbols in column 3 and row 3 (medium waveforms) because these stimuli<br />

are highlighted simultaneously with the target. All other responses are to non-target symbols (thin<br />

waveforms). Each response is the average <strong>of</strong> 30 stimulus presentations

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!