Authors : Sanchita A. Salunkhe; Samarjeet A. Salunkhe

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 9 - September

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4yj83vzz

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/342r9dpe

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP097

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Direct control of mechanical or electrical equipment through mental activity is made possible by brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), often referred to as brain-machine interfaces (BMIs). Using only brain signals, users of BCIs can operate external systems without using neurostimulators, which trigger neural tissues. This allows users to avoid using peripheral neurological and muscle systems. The brain's ability to incorporate and regulate mechanical devices as extensions of its own physiological processes is demonstrated by this capability.When it comes to helping those with severe impairments, BCI systems have a lot of potential uses. For people who suffer from neurological conditions like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, brainstem stroke, or spinal cord injury who are completely paralyzed or "locked in," they provide a substantial benefit in terms of communication. By directly converting brain intent into executable commands, BCI technology aims to enable communication. This is especially helpful for those who are unable to speak.Neuroprosthetics, which attempt to restore lost motor and sensory functions, have been the main focus of BCI research and development. These systems make use of artificial devices to treat brain-related illnesses, take over for faulty nervous system functions, and compensate for compromised sensory organs. As this science develops, brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have the potential to improve cognitive capacities and the quality of life for people with severe disabilities.

Keywords : Resting State Networks (Rsns), Signal-To-Noise Ratio In Bcis , Bionic Limbs , Neuroengineering.

References :

1. Birbaumer N. Breaking the silence: brain–computer interfaces (BCI) for communication and motor control. Psychophysiology. 2006 Nov;43(6):517-32.
2. Ienca M, Haselager P. Hacking the brain: brain–computer interfacing technology and the ethics of neurosecurity. Ethics and information technology. 2016 Jun;18:117-29.
3. Ramadan RA, Refat S, Elshahed MA, Ali RA. Basics of brain computer interface. Brain-Computer Interfaces: Current Trends and Applications. 2015:31-50.
4. Anupama HS, Cauvery NK, Lingaraju GM. Brain computer interface and its types-a study. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology. 2012 May 1;3(2):739.
5. Mak JN, Wolpaw JR. Clinical applications of brain-computer interfaces: current state and future prospects. IEEE reviews in biomedical engineering. 2009 Dec 1;2:187-99.
6. Bamdad M, Zarshenas H, Auais MA. Application of BCI systems in neurorehabilitation: a scoping review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. 2015 Sep 3;10(5):355-64.
7. Lupu RG, Ungureanu F, Cimpanu C. Brain-computer interface: Challenges and research perspectives. In2019 22nd International Conference on Control Systems and Computer Science (CSCS) 2019 May 28 (pp. 387-394). IEEE.
8. Bernal SL, Celdrán AH, Pérez GM, Barros MT, Balasubramaniam S. Security in brain-computer interfaces: state-of-the-art, opportunities, and future challenges. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 2021 Jan 2;54(1):1-35.
9. Saha S, Mamun KA, Ahmed K, Mostafa R, Naik GR, Khandoker A, Darvishi S, Baumert M. Progress in brain computer interfaces: challenges and trends. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.03442. 2021 Jan.
10. Abdulkader SN, Atia A, Mostafa MS. Brain computer interfacing: Applications and challenges. Egyptian Informatics Journal. 2015 Jul 1;16(2):213-30.
11. Challenges in clinical applications of brain computer interfaces in individuals with spinal cord injury
12. Li Q, Ding D, Conti M. Brain-computer interface applications: Security and privacy challenges. In2015 IEEE conference on communications and network security (CNS) 2015 Sep 28 (pp. 663-666). IEEE.
13. Veena N, Anitha N. A review of non-invasive BCI devices. Int. J. Biomed. Eng. Technol. 2020;34(3):205-33.
14. Schalk G, Brunner P, Gerhardt LA, Bischof H, Wolpaw JR. Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs): detection instead of classification. Journal of neuroscience methods. 2008 Jan 15;167(1):51-62.
15. Millán JD, Rupp R, Müller-Putz GR, Murray-Smith R, Giugliemma C, Tangermann M, Vidaurre C, Cincotti F, Kübler A, Leeb R, Neuper C. Combining brain–computer interfaces and assistive technologies: state-of-the-art and challenges. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2010 Sep 7;4:161.
16. Hochberg LR, Serruya MD, Friehs GM, Mukand JA, Saleh M, Caplan AH, Branner A, Chen D, Penn RD, Donoghue JP. Neuronal ensemble control of prosthetic devices by a humanwith tetraplegia. Nature 2006;442(7099):164–71.
17. Sannelli, C., Vidaurre, C., Müller, K.R. and Blankertz, B., 2016. Ensembles of adaptive spatial filters increase BCI performance: an online evaluation. Journal of neural engineering, 13(4), p.046003.
18. Samek, W., Meinecke, F.C. and Müller, K.R., 2013. Transferring subspaces between subjects in brain--computer interfacing. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 60(8), pp.2289-2298.
19. Ramoser, H., Muller-Gerking, J. and Pfurtscheller, G., 2000. Optimal spatial filtering of single trial EEG during imagined hand movement. IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering, 8(4), pp.441-446. 20)
20. Krauledat, M., Schröder, M., Blankertz, B. and Müller, K.R., 2007. Reducing calibration time for brain-computer interfaces: A clustering approach. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 753-760).
21. Jayaram, V., Alamgir, M., Altun, Y., Scholkopf, B., & Grosse-Wentrup, M. (2016). Transfer learning in brain-computer interfaces. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 11(1), 20-31.
22. Combaz, A. and Van Hulle, M.M., 2015. Simultaneous detection of P300 and steady-state visually evoked potentials for hybrid brain-computer interface. PLoS One, 10(3), p.e0121481.
23. Farwell, L.A., Richardson, D.C., Richardson, G.M. and Furedy, J.J., 2014. Brain fingerprinting classification concealed informationtest detects US Navy military medical information with P300. Frontiers in neuroscience, 8, p.410.
24. Rao, R.P., Stocco, A., Bryan, M., Sarma, D., Youngquist, T.M., Wu, J. and Prat, C.S., 2014. A direct brain-to-brain interface in humans. PloS one, 9(11), p.e111332.
25. Grau, C., Ginhoux, R., Riera, A., Nguyen, T.L., Chauvat, H., Berg, M., Amengual, J.L., Pascual-Leone, A. and Ruffini, G.,2014. Conscious brain-to-brain communication in humans using non-invasive technologies. PLoS One, 9(8), p.e105225.
26. Pais-Vieira, M., Lebedev, M., Kunicki, C., Wang, J. and Nicolelis, M.A., 2013. A brain-to-brain interface for real-time sharingof sensorimotor information. Scientific reports, 3, p.1319. 27)
27. Botrel, L., Holz, E.M. and Kübler, A., 2015. Brain Painting V2: evaluation of P300-based brain-computer interface for creative expression by an end-user following the user-centered design. Brain-Computer Interfaces, 2(2-3), pp.135-149.
28. Combaz, A. and Van Hulle, M.M., 2015. Simultaneous detection of P300 and steady-state visually evoked potentials for hybrid brain-computer interface. PLoS One, 10(3), p.e0121481.
29. Allison, B.Z., Brunner, C., Kaiser, V., Müller-Putz, G.R., Neuper, C. and Pfurtscheller, G., 2010. Toward a hybrid brain–computer interface based on imagined movement and visual attention. Journal of neural engineering, 7(2), p.026007. 30)
30. He, B., Yang, L., Wilke, C. and Yuan, H., 2011. Electrophysiological imaging of brain activity and connectivity—challengesand opportunities. IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering, 58(7), pp.1918-1931.
31. Bashashati, A., Fatourechi, M., Ward, R.K. and Birch, G.E., 2007. A survey of signal processing algorithms in brain–computer interfaces based on electrical brain signals. Journal of Neural engineering, 4(2), p.R32.
32. Abu-Alqumsan, M. and Peer, A., 2016. Advancing the detection of steady-state visual evoked potentials in brain–computer interfaces. Journal of neural engineering, 13(3), p.036005.
33. Min, B.K., Marzelli, M.J. and Yoo, S.S., 2010. Neuroimaging-based approaches in the brain–computer interface. Trends in biotechnology, 28(11), pp.552-560.
34. Zhang, R., Xu, P., Chen, R., Li, F., Guo, L., Li, P., Zhang, T. and Yao, D., 2015. Predicting inter-session performance of SMRbased brain–computer interface using the spectral entropy of resting-state EEG. Brain topography, 28(5), pp.680-690.
35. Wang, H., McIntosh, A.R., Kovacevic, N., Karachalios, M. and Protzner, A.B., 2016. Age-related multiscale changes in brain signal variability in pre-task versus post-task resting-state EEG. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 28(7), pp.971-984.