Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35937679›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

2020 International brain-computer interface competition: A review.

Ji-Hoon Jeong, Jeong-Hyun Cho, Young-Eun Lee, Seo-Hyun Lee, Gi-Hwan Shin, Young-Seok Kweon, José Del R Millán, Klaus-Robert Müller, Seong-Whan Lee

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Non-Invasive Brain-Computer Interfaces: State of the Art and Trends.IEEE reviews in biomedical engineering · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Identifying Thematics in a Brain-Computer Interface Research.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Ji-Hoon JeongSchool of Computer Science, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, South Korea.
Jeong-Hyun ChoDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Young-Eun LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Seo-Hyun LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Gi-Hwan ShinDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Young-Seok KweonDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
José Del R MillánDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States.
Klaus-Robert MüllerDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Seong-Whan LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Korea University · KRChungbuk National University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The brain-computer interface (BCI) has been investigated as a form of communication tool between the brain and external devices. BCIs have been extended beyond communication and control over the years. The 2020 international BCI competition aimed to provide high-quality neuroscientific data for open access that could be used to evaluate the current degree of technical advances in BCI. Although there are a variety of remaining challenges for future BCI advances, we discuss some of more recent application directions: (i) few-shot EEG learning, (ii) micro-sleep detection (iii) imagined speech decoding, (iv) cross-session classification, and (v) EEG(+ear-EEG) detection in an ambulatory environment. Not only did scientists from the BCI field compete, but scholars with a broad variety of backgrounds and nationalities participated in the competition to address these challenges. Each dataset was prepared and separated into three data that were released to the competitors in the form of training and validation sets followed by a test set. Remarkable BCI advances were identified through the 2020 competition and indicated some trends of interest to BCI researchers.

Indexed as

brain-computer interface (BCI)competitionelectroencephalogramneural decodingopen datasets

Identifiers

PMID35937679
PMCPMC9354666
OpenAlexW4286697392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.