Team PhyPA: Brain-Computer Interfacing for Everyday Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract

Keywords brain-computer interface, human-computer interaction, neuroadaptive technology IntroductionPersonal computers and other forms of interactive technology are central to our society's productivity, livelihood, and entertainment. For many people, a large part of the day is spent operating machines in one way or another. This pervasiveness of technology has been made possible by vast improvements in, among other things, the processing power available to these machines. The machines' capabilities have increased immensely-unlike, however, our own abilities to tell these machines what to do. Although the interaction techniques have become more natural and intuitive over the years, these are, in one perspective, superficial improvements: In essence, all communication from a human to a machine still requires the human to translate their intentions into a sequence of small, discrete commands, e.g. pressing one key, opening one menu, touching one button, making one gesture… This represents a communication bottleneck [1] between the human operator (user) and the machine that is operated, as well as a source of potential error. Also in other ways can present-day human-computer interaction be said to be asymmetrical [2]: different strengths and weaknesses of humans and machines, differences in information processing capabilities, natural versus machine logic… These differences between man and machine can be complimentary if a proper division of labour and cooperation strategy can be found. At present, however, the human must ultimately abide by the machine's logic, which limits efficient cooperation.One way to alleviate the issue of asymmetry, is to give the computer more information about its user, in order for it to be able to better interpret or even foresee the given commands, and adapt accordingly. For example, when we humans see that our colleague is currently busy, we will probably decide not to ask them for a hand with our own work. Similarly, a computer could decide not to notify us of potential updates if it could know that we are currently in thought.The above-mentioned communication bottleneck and unnatural nature of present-day interaction techniques, however, prevents us from informing the computer of all relevant information. We must look for alternative means to provide information to our machines.

What is it like to use a BCI? – insights from an interview study with brain-computer interface users

“…Using a BCI means being active. 1 Users need to perform certain mental tasks, in most cases by either concentrating on particular stimuli or imagining various body movements [2,6]. These can be more or less strenuous, both mentally and physically.…”

“…The brain signals can be measured invasively or noninvasively, most commonly an electroencephalography (EEG) is used by placing electrodes on the surface of the skull [2,3]. Three types of BCIs can be distinguished according to the brain activity production that is being used [6].…”

“…The user's brain activity is simply measured when it is confronted with certain tasks. Passive BCIs are used to examine cognitive states like mental workload or attention, or affective states [6].…”

Using brain-computer interfaces: a scoping review of studies employing social research methods

“…Relevant brain activity from BCI users can be detected either with non-invasive (mostly with electroencephalography (EEG)) or invasive methods [6, 9, 15–17]. Three types of brain activity production and use by the technology can be distinguished [18]. (1) Passive BCIs use brain activity not voluntarily produced by the person, such as mental workload or affective states [18].…”

“…Three types of brain activity production and use by the technology can be distinguished [18]. (1) Passive BCIs use brain activity not voluntarily produced by the person, such as mental workload or affective states [18]. (2) Reactive BCIs are based on changes in brain activity which occur as a result of an individual’s voluntarily focused attention on a specific external stimulus (mostly visual, but also auditory or somatosensory) among a multitude of irrelevant stimuli [5, 18].…”