ArticleScientific reports2022
Brain computer interface to distinguish between self and other related errors in human agent collaboration.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wearable high-density EMG sleeve for complex hand gesture classification and continuous joint angle estimation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Using event-related brain potentials to evaluate motor-auditory latencies in virtual reality.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When a human and machine collaborate on a shared task, ambiguous events might occur that could be perceived as an error by the human partner. In such events, spontaneous error-related potentials (ErrPs) are evoked in the human brain. Knowing whom the human perceived as responsible for the error would help a machine in co-adaptation and shared control paradigms to better adapt to human preferences. Therefore, we ask whether self- and agent-related errors evoke different ErrPs. Eleven subjects participated in an electroencephalography human-agent collaboration experiment with a collaborative trajectory-following task on two collaboration levels, where movement errors occurred as trajectory deviations. Independently of the collaboration level, we observed a higher amplitude of the responses on the midline central Cz electrode for self-related errors compared to observed errors made by the agent. On average, Support Vector Machines classified self- and agent-related errors with 72.64% accuracy using subject-specific features. These results demonstrate that ErrPs can tell if a person relates an error to themselves or an external autonomous agent during collaboration. Thus, the collaborative machine will receive more informed feedback for the error attribution that allows appropriate error identification, a possibility for correction, and avoidance in future actions.
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.