Research ReportsNo Access

N1 WAVE IN THE P300 BCI IS NOT SENSITIVE TO THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF STIMULI

SERGEY L. SHISHKIN

Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1/12, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia

Search for more papers by this author

ILYA P. GANIN

Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1/12, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia

Search for more papers by this author

IVAN A. BASYUL

Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1/12, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia

Faculty of Biology, N. I. Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod, Nizhni Novgorod, Russia

Search for more papers by this author

ALEXANDER Y. ZHIGALOV

Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1/12, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia

Search for more papers by this author

, and

ALEXANDER Ya. KAPLAN

Faculty of Biology, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1/12, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219635209002320Cited by:26 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

One of the widely used paradigms for the brain-computer interface (BCI), the P300 BCI, was proposed by Farwell and Donchin as a variation of the classical visual oddball paradigm, known to elicit the P300 component of the brain event-related potentials (ERP). We show that this paradigm, unlike the standard oddball paradigm, elicit not only the P300 wave but also a strong posterior N1 wave. Moreover, we present evidence that the sensitivity of this ERP component to targets cannot be explained by the variations of the perceived stimuli energy. This evidence is based on comparing the ERP obtained for usual P300 BCI stimuli and for the "inverted" stimulation scheme with low stimulus related variations of light energy (gray letters on the light gray background, "highlighted" by very light darkening). Despite the dramatic difference between the stimuli in the standard and "inverted" schemes, no difference between N1 amplitudes were found, supporting the view that this component's sensitivity to targets cannot be based simply on "foveating" the target, but may be related to spatial attention mechanisms, which involvement is natural for the P300 BCI. Efforts to optimize the P300 BCI should address better use of both P300 and N1 waves.

Keywords:

References

B. Z. Allison and J. A. Pineda, IEEE Trans. Neural. Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 11, 110 (2003), DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2003.814448. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Y. Arbel and E. Donchin, Psychophysiol. 45, S107 (2008). Google Scholar
N. Birbaumer and L. G. Cohen, J. Physiol. 579, 621 (2007), DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.125633. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
L. A. Farwell and E. Donchin, EEG. Clin. Neurophysiol. 70, 510 (1988), DOI: 10.1016/0013-4694(88)90149-6. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
C. Gugeret al., Neurosci. Lett. 462, 94 (2009), DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2009.06.045. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. Hill et al. , Effects of stimulus type and of error-correcting code design on BCI speller performance , Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 21: Proc. of the 2008 Conference , eds. D. Koller and et. al. ( MIT Press , Cambridge, MA, USA , 2009 ) . Google Scholar
S. A. Hillyard, E. K. Vogel and S. J. Luck, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 353, 1257 (1998). Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
U. Hoffmannet al., J. Neurosci. Meth. 167, 115 (2008), DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.005. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
B. Honget al., Clin. Neurophysiol. 120, 1658 (2009), DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.06.026. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
S. Johanneset al., Cog. Br. Res. 2, 189 (1995), DOI: 10.1016/0926-6410(95)90008-X. Crossref, Google Scholar
A. Kaplanet al., Int. J. Psychophysiol. 69, 166 (2008), DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.05.426. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
A. Y. Kaplanet al., Int. J. Neurosci. 115, 781 (2005), DOI: 10.1080/00207450590881975. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
V. A. Konyshevet al., Ross. Fiziol. Zh. Im. I. M. Sechenova. 93, 141 (2007). Medline, Google Scholar
D. J. Krusienskiet al., J. Neurosci. Meth. 167, 15 (2008), DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.07.017. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
G. R. Mangun, Psychophysiol. 32, 4 (1995), DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1995.tb03400.x. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
E. S. Mikhailovaet al., Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deiat. Im. I. P. Pavlova. 58, 302 (2008). Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
N. Neumannet al., Neuropsychologia. 41, 1028 (2003), DOI: 10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00298-1. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
A. Nijholt , B. Reuderink and D. O. Bos , Turning shortcomings into challenges: Brain-computer interfaces for games , INTETAIN 2009 9 , LNICST , eds. A. Reidsma and D. Hondorp ( 2009 ) . Google Scholar
L. L. Saling and J. G. Phillips, Brain. Res. Bull. 73, 1 (2007), DOI: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2007.02.009. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. Salvaris and F. Sepulveda, J. Neural. Eng. 6, 046011 (2009), DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/6/4/046011. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
G. Schalket al., IEEE. Trans. Biomed. Eng. 51, 1034 (2004), DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2004.827072. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
E. W. Sellerset al., Biol. Psychol. 73, 242 (2006), DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2006.04.007. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
E. W. Sellers et al. , Towards Brain-Computer Interfacing , eds. Dornhege et al. ( MIT Press , 2007 ) . Google Scholar
Society for Psychophysiological Research, Abstracts for the 49th Annual Meeting. October 21–24, 2009 . Google Scholar
K. Takanoet al., Clin. Neurophysiol. 120, 1562 (2009), DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.06.002. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. R. Wolpaw, J. Physiol. 579, 613 (2007), DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.125948. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. R. Wolpawet al., Clin. Neurophysiol. 113, 767 (2002), DOI: 10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00057-3. Crossref, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar