You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Online Adaptation of a c-VEP Brain-Computer Interface(BCI) Based on Error-Related Potentials and Unsupervised Learning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0051077 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martin Spüler, Wolfgang Rosenstiel, Martin Bogdan |
| Abstract |
The goal of a Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) is to control a computer by pure brain activity. Recently, BCIs based on code-modulated visual evoked potentials (c-VEPs) have shown great potential to establish high-performance communication. In this paper we present a c-VEP BCI that uses online adaptation of the classifier to reduce calibration time and increase performance. We compare two different approaches for online adaptation of the system: an unsupervised method and a method that uses the detection of error-related potentials. Both approaches were tested in an online study, in which an average accuracy of 96% was achieved with adaptation based on error-related potentials. This accuracy corresponds to an average information transfer rate of 144 bit/min, which is the highest bitrate reported so far for a non-invasive BCI. In a free-spelling mode, the subjects were able to write with an average of 21.3 error-free letters per minute, which shows the feasibility of the BCI system in a normal-use scenario. In addition we show that a calibration of the BCI system solely based on the detection of error-related potentials is possible, without knowing the true class labels. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 144 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 16% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 13% |
| Unknown | 23 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 51 | 32% |
| Computer Science | 36 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 10 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 28 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2013.
All research outputs
#13,026,495
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#102,527
of 193,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,141
of 277,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,233
of 4,765 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,765 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.