Brain–Computer Interfaces - Index of

Toward Ubiquitous BCIs 373
controls. He hears rumors that the online BCI game champion cheats because he
has an invasive BCI that provides cleaner signals, or by hacking the data stream to
introduce signals that did not come from his BCI.
A scenario like this may be feasible after 10 years or so, and might involve other
physiological signals too. For example, BNCI information from eye activity, heart
rate, breathing, and facial muscles could help detect errors, since errors could cause
people to blink, frown, sigh, or otherwise react.
Effective integration requires greater attention to usability. In the above example,
the BCIs do not demand too much attention or valuable real estate on the users’
faces or heads. BCIs are ready to draw more heavily from ample research in human–
computer interaction (HCI) and effective software design [3]. Clunky interfaces that
are hard to learn or understand will be harder to sell. Designers should avoid the
“Midas touch problem,” in which a user accidentally sends a message or command
[49]. This risk depends on the BCI approach. With ERD BCIs, people might accidentally
send a command if they are thinking about sports; with P300 BCIs, a
wrong message may be sent if the user is distracted or surprised, which can produce
a P300. Hardware usability includes developing headwear that is comfortable,
lightweight, easy to don and remove, and does not interfere with vision or other
headworn devices [20].
While the recent discussion has focused on BCIs and modern computing environments,
future BCIs will need to interact with other emerging technologies. How
can BCIs best be integrated with next generation operating systems, input mechanisms,
headsets and other worn devices, and pervasive computing environments?
How can a BCI contribute to the expected rise in virtual and augmented reality environments?
Consider an augmented reality environment in which users simply look
at specific devices, locations, or people, and then think specific thoughts to manipulate
those devices, go to those locations, or message those people. Other thoughts
might allow other actions, such as learning more about a target object, storing an
image of the target, or making notes to oneself. The merits of BCI input depend on
which emerging technologies become widespread.
2.6 Appearance
Both hardware and software are becoming more cosmetically appealing, another
necessary trend that will likely continue. Early BCIs, like the systems used today in
most labs and patients’ homes, require electrode caps over the entire head, studded
with electrodes oozing gooey electrode gel that look ridiculous. Newer systems with
better looking sensors that are smoothly integrated into unobtrusive head mounted
devices are more likely to be adopted. In fact, there seem to be at least three
diverging styles: the “futuristic” look by game manufacturers and others going after
enthusiastic technophiles; the “conservative” look by medical device manufacturers
and others who instead want to seem safe and established; and the “minimalist”
approach of some dry electrode groups and others of trying to embed electrodes in
glasses, microphones, and other established headwear.