ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Transfer Learning in Trajectory Decoding: Sensor or Source Space?
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, across-participant and across-session transfer learning was investigated to minimize the calibration time of the brain-computer interface (BCI) system in the context of continuous hand trajectory decoding. We reanalyzed data from a study with 10 able-bodied participants across three sessions. A leave-one-participant-out (LOPO) model was utilized as a starting model. Recursive exponentially weighted partial least squares regression (REW-PLS) was employed to overcome the memory limitation due to the large pool of training data. We considered four scenarios: generalized with no update (Gen), generalized with cumulative update (GenC), and individual models with cumulative (IndC) and non-cumulative (Ind) updates, with each one trained with sensor-space features or source-space features. The decoding performance in generalized models (Gen and GenC) was lower than the chance level. In individual models, the cumulative update (IndC) showed no significant improvement over the non-cumulative model (Ind). The performance showed the decoder's incapability to generalize across participants and sessions in this task. The results suggested that the best correlation could be achieved with the sensor-space individual model, despite additional anatomical information in the source-space features. The decoding pattern showed a more localized pattern around the precuneus over three sessions in Ind models.
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.