ArticleScientific reports2020
Asynchronous c-VEP communication tools-efficiency comparison of low-target, multi-target and dictionary-assisted BCI spellers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Different Visual Feedback Methods for Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) Based on Code-Modulated Visual Evoked Potentials (cVEP).Brain sciences · 2024Article
- High-Density Electroencephalogram Facilitates the Detection of Small Stimuli in Code-Modulated Visual Evoked Potential Brain-Computer Interfaces.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Advancements in brain-computer interfaces for the rehabilitation of unilateral spatial neglect: a concise review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
- A Bayesian dynamic stopping method for evoked response brain-computer interfacing.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Blink-To-Live eye-based communication system for users with speech impairments.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Influence of spatial frequency in visual stimuli for cVEP-based BCIs: evaluation of performance and user experience.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Riemannian geometry-based transfer learning for reducing training time in c-VEP BCIs.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Dual Passive Reactive Brain-Computer Interface: A Novel Approach to Human-Machine Symbiosis.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2022Article
- Brain-Computer Interface: Advancement and Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Keyboards and smartphones allow users to express their thoughts freely via manual control. Hands-free communication can be realized with brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) based on code-modulated visual evoked potentials (c-VEPs). Various variations of such spellers have been developed: Low-target systems, multi-target systems and systems with dictionary support. In general, it is not clear which kinds of systems are optimal in terms of reliability, speed, cognitive load, and visual load. The presented study investigates the feasibility of different speller variations. 58 users tested a 4-target speller and a 32-target speller with and without dictionary functionality. For classification, multiple individualized spatial filters were generated via canonical correlation analysis (CCA). We used an asynchronous implementation allowing non-control state, thus aiming for high accuracy rather than speed. All users were able to control the tested spellers. Interestingly, no significant differences in accuracy were found: 94.4%, 95.5% and 94.0% for 4-target spelling, 32-target spelling, and dictionary-assisted 32-target spelling. The mean ITRs were highest for the 32-target interface: 45.2, 96.9 and 88.9 bit/min. The output speed in characters per minute, was highest in dictionary-assisted spelling: 8.2, 19.5 and 31.6 characters/min. According to questionnaire results, 86% of the participants preferred the 32-target speller over the 4-target speller.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.