Brian Electrical Activity Acquisition and Decoding Algorithms For Using BMIs
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/gy823a26Keywords:
Brain-computer interface, ECoG, EEG, linear algorithm, deep learning.Abstract
Physical disabilities in limbs often lead to severe impacts on personal life and work. However, BMI technology offers hope for amputees or paralyzed individuals to regain control and motor abilities. By reading signals from the brain's motor cortex, BMI technology enables the control of robotic arms, cursors, and more, facilitating functional recovery. The key lies in identifying and extracting information related to specific tasks or intentions from brain signals, where the decoder determines the accuracy, reliability, and sensitivity of the final movements. This paper aims to provide a brief overview of the decoding steps in BMIs. The paper will discuss how the raw signals are acquired from the brain, including invasive BMI and noninvasive BMI, along with the respective advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches. Then, it will explore how these signals are processed into specific commands through both linear and nonlinear algorithms. Additionally, the paper will discuss the strengths, limitations, and feasibility of different decoding methods in human-computer interaction applications. This review offers researchers a preliminary understanding of the acquisition and decoding algorithms for brain electrical activity in BMIs. By evaluating the strengths and limitations of different algorithms, we can provide guidance for designing and improving BMI systems, thereby supporting the achievement of more accurate and efficient human-computer interaction.
Downloads
References
Chapin JK, Moxon KA, Markowitz RS, Nicolelis MA. Real-time control of a robot arm using simultaneously recorded neurons in the motor cortex. Nat Neurosci. 1999, 2(7): 664-670.
Serruya MD, Hatsopoulos NG, Paninski L, Fellows MR, Donoghue JP. Instant neural control of a movement signal. Nature. 2002, 416(6877): 141-2.
Taylor DM, Tillery SI, Schwartz AB. Direct cortical control of 3D neuroprosthetic devices. Science. 2002, 296(5574):1829-32.
Collinger JL, Wodlinger B, Downey JE, Wang W, Tyler-Kabara EC, Weber DJ, McMorland AJ, Velliste M, Boninger ML, Schwartz AB. High-performance neuroprosthetic control by an individual with tetraplegia. Lancet. 2013, 381(9866): 557-64.
Mulliken GH, Musallam S, Andersen RA. Decoding trajectories from posterior parietal cortex ensembles. J Neurosci. 2008, 28(48): 12913-26.
Kim SP, Simeral JD, Hochberg LR, Donoghue JP, Friehs GM, Black MJ. Point-and-click cursor control with an intracortical neural interface system by humans with tetraplegia. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2011, 19(2): 193-203.
Ethier, C., Oby, E., Bauman, M. et al. Restoration of grasp following paralysis through brain-controlled stimulation of muscles. Nature 2012, 485, 368–371.
Flamary R, Rakotomamonjy A. Decoding Finger Movements from ECoG Signals Using Switching Linear Models. Front Neurosci. 2012, 6: 29.
J. del R. Milan and J. M. Carmena, "Invasive or Noninvasive: Understanding Brain-Machine Interface Technology [Conversations in BME]," in IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 2010, 29(1), 16-22.
Carmena JM, Lebedev MA, Crist RE, O'Doherty JE, Santucci DM, Dimitrov DF, Patil PG, Henriquez CS, Nicolelis MA. Learning to control a brain-machine interface for reaching and grasping by primates. PLoS Biol. 2003, 1(2):E42.
Gilja V, Nuyujukian P, Chestek CA, Cunningham JP, Yu BM, Fan JM, Churchland MM, Kaufman MT, Kao JC, Ryu SI, Shenoy KV. A high-performance neural prosthesis enabled by control algorithm design. Nat Neurosci. 2012, 15(12):1752-1757.
Bensmaia, S., Miller, L. Restoring sensorimotor function through intracortical interfaces: progress and looming challenges. Nat Rev Neurosci 15, 313–325 (2014).
Gilja V, Pandarinath C, Blabe CH, Nuyujukian P, Simeral JD, Sarma AA, Sorice BL, Perge JA, Jarosiewicz B, Hochberg LR, Shenoy KV, Henderson JM. Clinical translation of a high-performance neural prosthesis. Nat Med. 2015, 21(10): 1142-1155.
Blankertz B, Dornhege G, Krauledat M, Müller KR, Curio G. The non-invasive Berlin Brain-Computer Interface: fast acquisition of effective performance in untrained subjects. Neuroimage. 2007, 37(2): 539-50.
Schirrmeister RT, Springenberg JT, Fiederer LDJ, Glasstetter M, Eggensperger K, Tangermann M, Hutter F, Burgard W, Ball T. Deep learning with convolutional neural networks for EEG decoding and visualization. Hum Brain Mapp. 2017, 38(11):5391-5420.
Lawhern VJ, Solon AJ, Waytowich NR, Gordon SM, Hung CP, Lance BJ. EEGNet: a compact convolutional neural network for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces. J Neural Eng. 2018, 15(5): 056013.
Blankertz B, Dornhege G, Krauledat M, Müller KR, Curio G. The non-invasive Berlin Brain-Computer Interface: fast acquisition of effective performance in untrained subjects. Neuroimage. 2007; 37(2):539-50.
Lotte F, Congedo M, Lécuyer A, Lamarche F, Arnaldi B. A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces. J Neural Eng. 2007, 4(2): R1-R13.
Li Y, Pan J, Wang F, Yu Z. A hybrid BCI system combining P300 and SSVEP and its application to wheelchair control. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2013, 60(11): 3156-66.
Xiao F. The Ethical Problems of Brain-Computer lnterface Technology and the Principles thatShould Be Followe [J]. Academic Journal of Zhongzhou,2022(07):95-102.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.







