ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Dual selections based knowledge transfer learning for cross-subject motor imagery EEG classification.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dataset Fragmentation, Cognitive Variability, and Reproducibility Challenges in EEG-Based Brain-Computer Interfaces: A PRISMA-Based Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Cross-variability decoding for motor imagery EEG signals: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- RMETNet: A cross-subject motor imagery EEG signal classification model based on TSLANet and riemannian geometry features.PloS one · 2026Article
- TCPL: task-conditioned prompt learning for few-shot cross-subject motor imagery EEG decoding.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Riemannian transfer learning based on log-Euclidean metric for EEG classification.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Motor imagery electroencephalograph (MI-EEG) has attracted great attention in constructing non-invasive brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) due to its low-cost and convenience. However, only a few MI-EEG classification methods have been recently been applied to BCIs, mainly because they suffered from sample variability across subjects. To address this issue, the cross-subject scenario based on domain adaptation has been widely investigated. However, existing methods often encounter problems such as redundant features and incorrect pseudo-label predictions in the target domain. Methods: To achieve high performance cross-subject MI-EEG classification, this paper proposes a novel method called Dual Selections based Knowledge Transfer Learning (DS-KTL). DS-KTL selects both discriminative features from the source domain and corrects pseudo-labels from the target domain. The DS-KTL method applies centroid alignment to the samples initially, and then adopts Riemannian tangent space features for feature adaptation. During feature adaptation, dual selections are performed with regularizations, which enhance the classification performance during iterations. Results and discussion: Empirical studies conducted on two benchmark MI-EEG datasets demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method under multi-source to single-target and single-source to single-target cross-subject strategies. The DS-KTL method achieves significant classification performance improvement with similar efficiency compared to state-of-the-art methods. Ablation studies are also conducted to evaluate the characteristics and parameters of the proposed DS-KTL method.
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.