ArticleFrontiers in neuroergonomics2026
Beyond flickering: introducing code-modulated motion visual evoked potentials for brain-computer interfacing.
Article in Frontiers in neuroergonomics, 2026. 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.
- Beyond flickering: introducing code-modulated motion visual evoked potentials for brain-computer interfacing.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a novel code-modulated motion visual evoked potential (c-MVEP) paradigm for brain-computer interfacing (BCI). To avoid the visual discomfort and fatigue often associated with traditional flickering stimuli, this paradigm uses pseudo-random sequences to visually stimulate objects using motion. We conducted offline and online experiments, to investigate signal characteristics and evaluate practical feasibility, respectively. In the offline experiment, EEG data were recorded and compared during sequential stimulation of a single target under four conditions: c-MVEP, code-modulated visual evoked potential (c-VEP), steady-state motion visual evoked potential (SSMVEP), and steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP). The c-MVEP evoked similar temporal and broadband spectral responses as c-VEP, with a comparable signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), although c-MVEP responses were more focused in the lower frequency range. While SSMVEP and SSVEP both showed clear harmonic oscillations, SSVEP yielded higher SNRs. Spatially, both motion-based stimulations peaked at Oz but spread across multiple electrodes, whereas both flicker-based stimulations were more localized at Oz. In the online experiment, we evaluated a four-target BCI using the same four conditions, testing the practical feasibility of the c-MVEP paradigm. The c-MVEP BCI reached a mean accuracy of 85.67% with an average selection time of 2.61 s, which was significantly lower than c-VEP (97.81%; 1.15 s) and SSVEP (93.42%; 1.94 s), but significantly higher than SSMVEP (64.91%; 4.18 s). The subjective ratings revealed no clear preference between the motion- and flicker-based paradigms, indicating comparable user comfort. Overall, this study demonstrates the strong potential of the newly proposed c-MVEP paradigm. By providing an effective, non-flickering alternative to traditional c-VEP and SSVEP, c-MVEP offers a highly viable approach for user-friendly BCI applications.
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.