Large scale investigation of the effect of gender on mu rhythm suppression in motor imagery brain-computer interfaces

References

• Pfurtscheller G, da Silva FL. Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles. Clin Neurophysiol. 1999;110(11):1842–1857. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(99)00141-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh A, Hussain AA, Lal S, et al. A comprehensive review on critical issues and possible solutions of motor imagery based electroencephalography brain-computer interface. Sensors. 2021a;21(6):2173. doi: 10.3390/s21062173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penaloza CI, Alimardani M, Nishio S. Android feedback-based training modulates sensorimotor rhythms during motor imagery. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2018;26(3):666–674. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2018.2792481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Brunner C, Schlögl A, et al. Mu rhythm (de) synchronization and EEG single-trial classification of different motor imagery tasks. Neuroimage. 2006;31(1):153–159. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benzy VK, Vinod AP, Subasree R, et al. Motor imagery hand movement direction decoding using brain computer interface to aid stroke recovery and rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2020;28(12):3051–3062. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2020.3039331
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alimardani M, Gherman DE. Individual differences in motor imagery BCIs: a study of gender, mental states and Mu suppression. In: 2022 10th International Winter Conference on Brain-Computer Interface (BCI); 2022 February; Gangwon, South Korea. IEEE. p. 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson MC. Critique the concept of BCI illiteracy. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019;25(4):1217–1233. doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0061-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang R, Li F, Zhang T, et al. Subject inefficiency phenomenon of motor imagery brain-computer interface: influence factors and potential solutions. Brain Sci Adv. 2020;6(3):224–241. doi: 10.26599/BSA.2020.9050021
   Google Scholar
• Allison BZ, Neuper C. Could anyone use a BCI? In: Tan D Nijholt A, editors. Brain-Computer Interfaces. Human-computer interaction series. London: Springer; 2010. DOI:10.1007/978-1-84996-272-8_3
   Google Scholar
• Blankertz B, Sannelli C, Halder S, et al. Neurophysiological predictor of SMR-based BCI performance. Neuroimage. 2010;51(4):1303–1309. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guger C, Edlinger G, Harkam W, et al. How many people are able to operate an EEG-based Brain-Computer Interface (BCI)? IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2003;11(2):145–147. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2003.814481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee MH, Kwon OY, Kim YJ, et al. EEG dataset and OpenBMI toolbox for three BCI paradigms: an investigation into BCI illiteracy. Gigascience. 2019;8(5):giz002. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giz002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeunet C, N’Kaoua B, Subramanian S, et al. Predicting mental imagery-based BCI performance from personality, cognitive profile and neurophysiological patterns. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0143962. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143962
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leeuwis N, Paas A, Alimardani M. Vividness of visual imagery and personality impact motor-imagery brain-computer interfaces. Front Human Neurosci. 2021a;15. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.634748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagedorn LJ, Leeuwis N, Alimardani M. Prediction of inefficient BCI users based on cognitive skills and personality traits. In: International Conference on Neural Information Processing s.l.:Springer; 2021. p. 81–89.
   Google Scholar
• Grosse-Wentrup M, Schölkopf B. A review of performance variations in SMR-based Brain− Computer interfaces (BCIs). In: Christoph G, Brendan ZA, Günter E, editors. Brain-Computer Interface Research: A State-of-the-Art Summary. 2013. p. 39–51. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-36083-1
   Google Scholar
• Ahn M, Jun SC. Performance variation in motor imagery brain–computer interface: a brief review. J Neurosci Methods. 2015;243:103–110. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.01.033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzdaka E, Benaroch C, Jeunet C, et al. Assessing the relevance of neurophysiological patterns to predict motor imagery-based BCI users’ performance. In: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC); 2020 October; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. IEEE. p. 2490–2495.
   Google Scholar
• Leeuwis N, Yoon S, Alimardani M. Functional connectivity analysis in motor imagery brain computer interfaces. Front Human Neurosci. 2021c;15:564. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.732946
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myrden A Chau T. Effects of user mental state on EEG-BCI performance. Front Human Neur. 2015;9:308.
   Google Scholar
• Mladenović J, Frey J, Pramij S, et al. Towards identifying optimal biased feedback for various user states and traits in motor imagery BCI. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2022a;69(3):1101–1110. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2021.3113854
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rimbert S, Zaepffel M, Riff P, et al. Hypnotic state modulates sensorimotor beta rhythms during real movement and motor imagery. Front psychol. 2019b;10:2341. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeunet C, N’Kaoua B, Lotte F. Advances in user-training for mental-imagery-based BCI control: Psychological and cognitive factors and their neural correlates. Prog Brain Res. 2016;228:3–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leeuwis N, Alimardani M. High aptitude motor-imagery BCI users have better visuospatial memory. In: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC); s.l.:s.n; 2020. p. 1518–1523.
   Google Scholar
• Hammer EM, Kaufmann T, Kleih SC, et al. Visuo-motor coordination ability predicts performance with brain-computer interfaces controlled by Modulation of Sensorimotor Rhythms (SMR). Front Human Neurosci. 2014;8:574. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00574
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rimbert S, Gayraud N, Bougrain L, et al. Can a subjective questionnaire be used as brain-computer interface performance predictor? Front Hum Neurosci. 2019a;12:529. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rimbert S, Lotte F. ERD modulations during motor imageries relate to users’ traits and BCI performances. In: 2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC); 2022 July; Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. IEEE. p. 203–207.
   Google Scholar
• Randolph AB. Not all created equal: individual-technology fit of brain-computer interfaces. In: 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; s.l.:IEEE; 2012. p. 572–578.
   Google Scholar
• Cantillo-Negrete J, Gutierrez-Martinez J, Carino-Escobar RI, et al. An approach to improve the performance of subject-independent BCIs-based on motor imagery allocating subjects by gender. Biomed Eng Online. 2014;13(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-13-158
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zapała D, Zabielska-Mendyk E, Augustynowicz P, et al. The effects of handedness on sensorimotor rhythm desynchronization and motor-imagery BCI control. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):2087.
   Google Scholar
• Pillette L, Roc A, N’Kaoua B, et al. Experimenters’ influence on mental-imagery based brain-computer interface user training. Inter J Human Comp Stud. 2021;149:102603. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenović J, Lotte F, Mattout J, et al. Simple probabilistic data-driven model for adaptive BCI feedback. In: Neuroadaptive Technologies, NAT’22; Lubenaü, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Catrambone V, Greco A, Averta G, et al. Predicting object-mediated gestures from brain activity: an EEG study on gender differences. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2019;27(3):411–418. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2019.2898469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsayed NE, Tolba AS, Rashad MZ, et al. A deep learning approach for brain computer interaction-motor execution EEG signal classification. IEEE Access. 2021;9:101513–101529. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3097797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen YY, Lambert KJ, Madan CR, et al. Mu oscillations and motor imagery performance: a reflection of intra-individual success, not inter-individual ability. Hum Mov Sci. 2021;78:102819. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2021.102819
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfurscheller G, Neuper C. Motor imagery and direct brain-computer communication. Proc IEEE. 2001;89(7):1123–1134. doi: 10.1109/5.939829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leeuwis N, Paas A, Alimardani M. Psychological and cognitive factors in motor imagery brain computer interfaces. DataverseNL; 2021b. 10.34894/Z7ZVOD. doi: 10.34894/Z7ZVOD
   Google Scholar
• Cho H, Ahn M, Ahn S, et al. EEG datasets for motor imagery brain–computer interface. GigaSci Database. 2017;6(7). doi: 10.1093/gigascience/gix034
   Google Scholar
• Dreyer P, Roc A, Pillette L, et al. A large EEG database with users’ profile information for motor imagery brain-computer interface research. Sci Data. 2023;10(1):580. doi: 10.1038/s41597-023-02445-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benaroch C, Yamamoto MS, Roc A, et al. When should MI-BCI feature optimization include prior knowledge, and which one? Brain-Computer Interfaces. 2022;9(2):115–128. doi: 10.1080/2326263X.2022.2033073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jäncke L. Sex/gender differences in cognition, neurophysiology, and neuroanatomy. F1000 Res. 2018;7.
   Google Scholar
• Joel D, Fausto-Sterling A. Beyond sex differences: new approaches for thinking about variation in brain structure and function. Phil Tran Roy Soc B: Bio Sci. 2016;371(1688):20150451.
   Google Scholar
• Kim TK, Park JH. More about the basic assumptions of t-test: normality and sample size. Korean J Anesth. 2019;72(4):331–335. doi: 10.4097/kja.d.18.00292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwak SG, Kim JH. Central limit theorem: the cornerstone of modern statistics. Korean J Anesth. 2017;70(2):144–156. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2017.70.2.144
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lotte F, Jeunet C. Defining and quantifying users’ mental imagery-based BCI skills: a first step. J Neural Eng. 2018;15(4):046030. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aac577
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood G, Kober SE. EEG neurofeedback is under strong control of psychosocial factors. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2018;43(4):293–300. doi: 10.1007/s10484-018-9407-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roc A, Pillette L, Mladenovic J, et al. A review of user training methods in brain computer interfaces based on mental tasks. J Neural Eng. 2021;18(1):011002. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/abca17
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alimardani M, Nishio S, Ishiguro H. Effect of biased feedback on motor imagery learning in BCI-teleoperation system. Front Syst Neurosci. 2014;8:52. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00052
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alimardani M, Nishio S, Ishiguro H, et al. The importance of visual feedback design in BCIs; from embodiment to motor imagery learning. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0161945. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161945
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tibrewal N, Leeuwis N, Alimardani M, et al. Classification of motor imagery EEG using deep learning increases performance in inefficient BCI users. PLoS One. 2022;17(7):e0268880. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268880
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh AK, Sahonero-Alvarez G, Mahmud M, et al. Towards bridging the gap between computational intelligence and neuroscience in brain-computer interfaces with a common description of systems and data. Front Neuroinform. 2021b;15:699840. doi: 10.3389/fninf.2021.699840
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar