ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Brain-machine interface based on deep learning to control asynchronously a lower-limb robotic exoskeleton: a case-of-study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- EEG-Controlled Exoskeleton for Walking and Standing: A Longitudinal Multimodal Dataset of Healthy Individuals.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Characterization of error-related potentials during the command of a lower-limb exoskeleton based on deep learning.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Obstacle Feature Information-Based Motion Decision-Making Method for Obstacle-Crossing Motions in Lower Limb Exoskeleton Robots.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis research focused on the development of a motor imagery (MI) based brain-machine interface (BMI) using deep learning algorithms to control a lower-limb robotic exoskeleton. The study aimed to overcome the limitations of traditional BMI approaches by leveraging the advantages of deep learning, such as automated feature extraction and transfer learning. The experimental protocol to evaluate the BMI was designed as asynchronous, allowing subjects to perform mental tasks at their own will.
methodsA total of five healthy able-bodied subjects were enrolled in this study to participate in a series of experimental sessions. The brain signals from two of these sessions were used to develop a generic deep learning model through transfer learning. Subsequently, this model was fine-tuned during the remaining sessions and subjected to evaluation. Three distinct deep learning approaches were compared: one that did not undergo fine-tuning, another that fine-tuned all layers of the model, and a third one that fine-tuned only the last three layers. The evaluation phase involved the exclusive closed-loop control of the exoskeleton device by the participants' neural activity using the second deep learning approach for the decoding.
resultsThe three deep learning approaches were assessed in comparison to an approach based on spatial features that was trained for each subject and experimental session, demonstrating their superior performance. Interestingly, the deep learning approach without fine-tuning achieved comparable performance to the features-based approach, indicating that a generic model trained on data from different individuals and previous sessions can yield similar efficacy. Among the three deep learning approaches compared, fine-tuning all layer weights demonstrated the highest performance.
conclusionThis research represents an initial stride toward future calibration-free methods. Despite the efforts to diminish calibration time by leveraging data from other subjects, complete elimination proved unattainable. The study's discoveries hold notable significance for advancing calibration-free approaches, offering the promise of minimizing the need for training trials. Furthermore, the experimental evaluation protocol employed in this study aimed to replicate real-life scenarios, granting participants a higher degree of autonomy in decision-making regarding actions such as walking or stopping gait.
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.