ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2025
Real-world evaluation of deep learning decoders for motor imagery EEG-based BCIs.
Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Dual-Branch Spatiotemporal Framework with Dynamic Weighted Permutation Entropy for Short-Window Motor Imagery EEG Decoding.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Entropy-Based Dual-Teacher Distillation for Efficient Motor Imagery EEG Classification.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Motor Imagery (MI) Electroencephalography (EEG)-based control in online Brain-Computer Interfaces requires decisions to be made within short temporal windows. However, the majority of published Deep Learning (DL) EEG decoders are developed and validated offline on public datasets using longer window lengths, leaving their real-time applicability unclear. Methods: To address this gap, we evaluate 10 representative DL decoders, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs), filter-bank CNNs, temporal convolutional networks (TCNs), and attention- and Transformer-based hybrids-under a soft real-time protocol using 2-s windows. We quantify performance using accuracy, sensitivity, precision, miss-as-neutral rate (MANR), false-alarm rate (FAR), information-transfer rate (ITR), and workload. To relate decoder behavior to physiological markers, we examine lateralization indices, mu-band power at C3 vs. C4, and topographical contrasts between MI and neutral conditions. Results: Results show shifts in performance ranking between offline and online BCI settings, along with a pronounced increase in inter-subject variability. Best online means were FBLight ConvNet 71.7% (±2.1) and EEG-TCNet 70.0% (±5.3), with attention/Transformer designs less stable. Errors were mainly Left-Right swaps while Neutral was comparatively stable. Lateralization indices/topomaps revealed subject-specific μ/β patterns consistent with class-wise precision/sensitivity. Discussion: Compact spectro-temporal CNN backbones combined with lightweight temporal context (such as TCNs or dilated convolutions) deliver more stable performance under short-time windows, whereas deeper attention and Transformer architectures are more susceptible to variation across subjects and sessions. This study establishes a reproducible benchmark and provides actionable guidance for designing and calibrating online-first EEG decoders that remain robust under real-world, short-time constraints.
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.