Abstract
EEG-based brain–computer interfaces (BCI) have promising therapeutic potential beyond traditional neurofeedback training, such as enabling personalized and optimized virtual reality (VR) neurorehabilitation paradigms where the timing and parameters of the visual experience is synchronized with specific brain states. While BCI algorithms are often designed to focus on whichever portion of a signal is most informative, in these brain-state-synchronized applications, it is of critical importance that the resulting decoder is sensitive to physiological brain activity representative of various mental states, and not to artifacts, such as those arising from naturalistic movements. In this study, we compare the relative classification accuracy with which different motor tasks can be decoded from both extracted brain activity and artifacts contained in the EEG signal. EEG data were collected from 17 chronic stroke patients while performing six different head, hand, and arm movements in a realistic VR-based neurorehabilitation paradigm. Results show that the artifactual component of the EEG signal is significantly more informative than brain activity with respect to classification accuracy. This finding is consistent across different feature extraction methods and classification pipelines. While informative brain signals can be recovered with suitable cleaning procedures, we recommend that features should not be designed solely to maximize classification accuracy, as this could select for remaining artifactual components. We also propose the use of machine learning approaches that are interpretable to verify that classification is driven by physiological brain states. In summary, whereas informative artifacts are a helpful friend in BCI-based communication applications, they can be a problematic foe in the estimation of physiological brain states.
Highlights
Since the voltage potentials of muscle activity measured with surface electrodes are several orders of magnitude higher than those generated by brain activity, this can cause Brain–computer interfaces (BCI) algorithms to learn to generate optimal output based on artifacts [2]
Whether or not EEG artifacts are problematic in BCI-based neurorehabilitation during naturalistic movements is an open question that we address in this study
This study highlights the need to consider the influence of movement-related artifacts when designing BCI-based neurorehabilitation paradigms to detect neurophysiological brain states
Summary
Brain–computer interfaces (BCI) are becoming increasingly applied in rehabilitative settings. At the root of every BCI is the transformation of recorded activity into quantifiable outputs. Brain activity, recorded as data measured from electroencephalogram (EEG), is in general mixed with artifacts such as those arising from muscle activity during the same time period [1]. Since the voltage potentials of muscle activity measured with surface electrodes are several orders of magnitude higher than those generated by brain activity, this can cause BCI algorithms to learn to generate optimal output based on artifacts [2]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.