Application of a Brain Computer Interfacing System in Comparing Visual verses Haptic Induction of Motor Imaginary Task

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：9

、訪客IP：3.15.235.196

姓名

薩特亞(SATYASAMBIT RATH) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

認知與神經科學研究所

論文名稱

(Application of a Brain Computer Interfacing System in Comparing Visual verses Haptic Induction of Motor Imaginary Task)

相關論文

★ 作業轉換能力之訓練與轉移效果探討	★ 全域型與局部型物體地標對人類空間巡行能力之貢獻
★ 兒童早期至晚期疼痛同理心的神經發展: 事件相關電位研究	★ 同理心老化的認知神經機轉:功能性磁振造影研究
★ 動作參數對於選擇性抑制的影響	★ 社會場景對於護理人員同理心之調控
★ 泛自閉症障礙症候群處理情緒人聲的不典型表現：腦電波研究	★ 即時回饋類型對於雙手協調動作學習之影響
★ Diversity and Commonality of Cognitive Profile among Static, Strategic and Interceptive Sports-Expertise	★ An FMRI Investigation of Malleable Numerical Representation
★ 動態照明在辦公環境應用之可行性評估與眼動儀偵測視覺疲勞之研究	★ Difference and Relationship between Voluntary and Involuntary Inhibition in Elderly and Young Groups
★ 以簡單施力作業及重複效應檢驗動作意象與執行之對應關係	★ 年輕與老年族群之控制化與自動化抑制交互影響的行為與事件相關電位特徵
★ 空間性及時間性資訊變化對序列學習影響之探討	★ 運用VGG網絡對靜息態功能性磁振造影成分圖進行區分

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

運用觸覺刺激的腦機介面，干擾認知功能運作的程度較運用視覺或聽覺刺激的腦機介面為低，而在現實世界中有很高的應用價值。先前文獻對於觸覺型腦機介面能否達到與視覺型相當的動作心像類型辨識率尚無結論；此外，運用極少量腦波頻道數是否能達到高動作心像類型辨識率亦屬未知。本研究試圖建立一個腦機介面架構，僅運用四個腦波頻道資訊來進行動作心像類型辨識，然後比較其辨識觸覺和視覺誘發動作心像時之正確率。我們發現應用共同空間型態(common spatial pattern)作為特徵提取器，以及線性區辨分析(linear discriminant analysis)為分類器(classifier)，對觸覺與視覺誘發的左、右手動作心像區辨正確率是相當的；而僅運用C3、C4、Fp1、和Fp2四個頻道的情況下，觸覺與視覺型腦機介面的辨識正確率都可達到85%。本研究之發現可作為未來發展高效能動作心像辨識腦機介面系統之基礎。

摘要(英)

Haptic-based Brain Computer Interface (BCI) has great values in real-world applications as it
is less intrusive than visual or auditory based BCI. It is not clear from previous literature
whether haptic-based BCI can achieve equivalent or even better accuracies when applied to the
classification of motor imagery. In addition, it was also not clear whether high classification
accuracy can be achieved in haptic cue based motor imagery BCI with few channels. The
current study sets out to establish a BCI framework using only four channels for motor imagery
classification, and to compare the accuracies between the haptic versus the visual cue based
BCI. We demonstrated that using common spatial pattern (CSP) as feature extractor and linear
discriminant analysis (LDA) algorithm as the classifier, the classification accuracy of the haptic
cue based motor imaginary BCI can reach comparable level as the visual-based one. We also
demonstrated that with only four EEG channels (C3, C4, Fp1, and Fp2), the mean accuracy of
both haptic and visual cue based motor imaginary BCI can reach a high level (~ 85%). The
current findings can serve as the foundation for efficient BCI implementation in motor imagery
classification for future research and real-world applications.

關鍵字(中)

★ 腦機介面
★ 觸覺線索
★ 視覺線索
★ 共同空間型態
★ 線性區辨分析

關鍵字(英)

★ BCI
★ haptic cue
★ visual cue
★ Common spatial pattern
★ linear discriminant analysis

論文目次

Chapter 1-Introduction 1
1.1- BCI Classification of Motor Imaginary Based on Visual Cues 2
1.2-Haptic Cue based motor imaginary BCI study 3
1.3 Aims of the current study 5
Chapter 2-Method 6
2.1-Data Collection 6
2.1.1-Participants 6
2.1.2-Data Acquisition 6
2.2-Experimental Paradigms for Different Cue Modalities 7
2.2.1-Visual Cue Experiment Protocol 8
2.2.2-Haptic Cue Experiment Protocol 9
2.3-Data verification 12
2.4-Preprocessing 15
2.5-Feature Extraction 17
2.6-Classification 20
2.7-Cross Validation: 21
2.8-Accuracies 22
Chapter 3-Results 26
3.1-Visual Cue based motor imaginary BCI result 26
3.2-Haptic Cue based motor imaginary BCI results 27
3.3-Comparison between the Visual and the Haptic-based BCI 27
Chapter 4-Discussion 29
4.1-Haptic stimuli and the organization of the somatosensory cortex 29
4.2-Channel selection and the accuracy of MI-BCI 31
Chapter 5-Conclusions 33
References 35

參考文獻

1. Brain–Computer Interfaces: Principles and Practice, Jonathan Wolpaw and Elizabeth Winter Wolpaw, 2012.
2. A brain-computer interface with vibrotactile biofeedback for haptic information, Aniruddha Chatterjee, Vikram Aggarwal, Ander Ramos, Soumyadipta Acharya and Nitish V Thakor Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 2007.
3. Vibrotactile Feedback for Brain-Computer Interface Operation, Febo Cincotti et al., Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2007.
4. An auditory brain-computer interface (BCI), F. Nijboer, A. Furdea, I. Gunst, J. Mellinger, D. J. McFarland, N. Birbaumer, and A. Kubler, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 2008.
5. What is feedback in clinical education, J. M. Van de Ridder, K. M. Stokking, W. C. McGaghie, and O. T. J. Ten Gate, 2008.
6. Brain-computer interfaces in medicine, J. J. Shih, D. J. Krusienski, and J. R. Wolpaw, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2012.
7. Towards a Spatial Ability Training to Improve Motor Imagery based Brain-Computer Interfaces (MI-BCIs) Performance: a Pilot Study, S. Teillet, F. Lotte, B. N’Kaoua, C. Jeunet, IEEE International Conference on Systems Man and Cybernetics (IEEE SMC), 2016.
8. Common spatial pattern and linear discriminant analysis for motor imagery classification, Shang-Lin Wu ; Chun-Wei Wu ; Nikhil R. Pal ; Chih-Yu Chen ; Shi-An Chen ; Chin-Teng Lin, IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence, Cognitive Algorithms, Mind, and Brain (CCMB), 2013.
9. Multimodal stimulation for a P300-based BCI, Aloise F., Lasorsa I., Brouwer A. M., Mattia D., Babiloni F., Salinari S., Int. J. Bioelectromagn. 9, 2007.
10. A tactile P300 brain-computer interface, Brouwer AM, van Erp JB, Front Neurosci, 2010.
11. Tactile, visual, and bimodal p300s: could bimodal p300s boost bci performance, Brouwer A.-M., Van Erp J. B. F., Aloise F., Cincotti F., Neuroscience, 2010.
12. Control-display mapping in brain-computer interfaces, Thurlings ME, van Erp JB, Brouwer AM, Blankertz B, Werkhoven P, Ergonomics, 2012.
13. Introducing the tactile speller: an ERP-based brain-computer interface for communication, van der Waal M, Severens M, Geuze J, Desain P J Neural Eng. 2012.
14. Tactually-evoked event-related potentials for bci-based wheelchair control in a virtual environment, Kaufmann T., Herweg A., Kubler A. ,.Proceedings of the Fifth International Brain Computer Interface Meeting, 2003.
15. ERS and ERD Analysis during The Imaginary Movement of Arms, Hong-Gi Yeom and Kwee-Bo Sim, International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems 2008, Oct. 14-17, 2008 in COEX, Seoul, Korea.
16. A survey of signal processing algorithms in brain–computer interfaces based on electrical brain signals, Ali Bashashati, Mehrdad Fatourechi, Rabab K Wardand Gary E Birch, J. Neural Eng., 2007.
17. Workshop on BCI signal processing: Feature extraction and translation, McFarland, D.J., Anderson, C.W., Muller, K.R., Schlogl, A., and Krusienski, D.J., IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilition Engineering, 2006.
18. Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain-computer interface (BCI): Feature selection by regression improves performance, McFarland, D.J., and Wolpaw, J.R., IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2005.
19. A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces, Lotte, F., Congedo, M., Leuyer, A., Lmarche, F., and Arnaldi, B., Journal of Neural Engineering, 2007.
20. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems, Fisher, R.A, Annals of Eugenics, 1936.
21. Using space and time to encode vibrotactile information: toward an estimate of the skin’s achievable throughput, Scott D. Novich, David M. Eagleman, Experimental Brain Research, 2015.
22. Machine learning, Tom M. Mitchell, 1997.

指導教授

張智宏

審核日期

2017-8-28

推文