Multichannel Spatial Filters for Enhancing SSVEP Detection

  • Izabela RejerEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 889)


One of the procedures often used in an SSVEP-BCI (Steady State Evoked Potential Brain Computer Interface) processing pipeline is multichannel spatial filtering. This procedure not only improves SSVEP-BCI classification accuracy but also provides higher flexibility in choosing the localization of EEG electrodes on the user scalp. The problem is, however, how to choose the spatial filter that provides the highest classification accuracy for the given BCI settings. Although there are some papers comparing filtering procedures, the comparison is usually done in terms of one, strictly defined BCI setup [1, 2]. Such comparisons do not inform, however, whether some filtering procedures are superior to the others regardless of the experimental conditions. The research reported in this paper partially fills this gap. During the research four spatial filtering procedures (MEC, MCC, CCA, and FBCCA) were compared under 15 slightly different SSVEP-BCI setups. The main finding was that none of the procedures showed clear predominance in all 15 setups. By applying not-the-best procedure the classification accuracy dropped significantly, even of more than 30%.


BCI SSVEP Brain Computer Interface Spatial filter CCA MEC MCC FBCCA 


  1. 1.
    Friman, O., Friman, O., Volosyak, I., Volosyak, I., Gräser, A., Gräser, A.: Multiple channel detection of steady-state visual evoked potentials for brain-computer interfaces. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 54, 742–750 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, X., Wang, Y., Gao, S., Jung, T.P., Gao, X.: Filter bank canonical correlation analysis for implementing a high-speed SSVEP-based brain-computer interface. J. Neural Eng. 12, 46008 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wolpaw, J.R., Birbaumer, N., McFarland, D.J., Pfurtscheller, G., Vaughan, T.M.: Brain Computer Interfaces for communication and control. Front. Neurosci. 4, 767–791 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Regan, D.: Human Brain Electrophysiology: Evoked Potentials and Evoked Magnetic Fields in Science and Medicine. Elsevier, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herrmann, C.S.: Human EEG responses to 1-100 Hz flicker: resonance phenomena in visual cortex and their potential correlation to cognitive phenomena. Exp. Brain Res. 137, 346–353 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vialatte, F.B., Maurice, M., Dauwels, J., Cichocki, A.: Steady-state visually evoked potentials: focus on essential paradigms and future perspectives. Prog. Neurobiol. 90, 418–438 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oikonomou, V.P., Liaros, G., Georgiadis, K., Chatzilari, E., Adam, K., Nikolopoulos, S., Kompatsiaris, I.: Comparative Evaluation of State-of-the-Art Algorithms for SSVEP-Based BCIs, pp. 1–33 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kołodziej, M., Majkowski, A., Oskwarek, Ł., Rak, R.J.: Comparison of EEG signal preprocessing methods for SSVEP recognition. In: 2016 39th International Conference on Telecommunication and Signal Processing TSP 2016, pp. 340–345 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu, D., Bieger, J., Garcia Molina, G., Aarts, R.M.: A survey of stimulation methods used in SSVEP-based BCIs. In: Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gao, X., Xu, D., Cheng, M., Gao, S.: A BCI-based environmental controller for the motion-disabled. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 11, 137–140 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gembler, F., Stawicki, P., Volosyak, I.: Exploring the possibilities and limitations of multitarget SSVEP-based BCI applications. In: Proceedings of Annual International Conference of IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society EMBS 2016–October, pp. 1488–1491 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Duszyk, A., Bierzyńska, M., Radzikowska, Z., Milanowski, P., Kus̈, R., Suffczyński, P., Michalska, M., Labęcki, M., Zwoliński, P., Durka, P.: Towards an optimization of stimulus parameters for brain-computer interfaces based on steady state visual evoked potentials. PLoS One 9 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, Q., Chen, K., Ai, Q., Xie, S.Q.: Review: Recent development of signal processing algorithms for SSVEP-based brain computer interfaces. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 34, 299–309 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lin, Z., Zhang, C., Wu, W., Gao, X.: Frequency recognition based on canonical correlation analysis for SSVEP-Based BCIs. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 54, 1172–1176 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhu, D., Molina, G.G., Mihajlović, V., Aartsl, R.M.: Phase synchrony analysis for SSVEP-based BCIs. In: Proceedings of ICCET 2010 - 2010 International Conference on Computer Engineering and Technology, vol. 2, pp. 329–333 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jasper, H.H.: The ten-twenty electrode system of the international federation in electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. EEG J. 10, 371–375 (1958)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Renard, Y., Lotte, F., Gibert, G., Congedo, M., Maby, E., Delannoy, V., Bertrand, O., Lecuyer, A.: OpenViBE: an open-source software platform to design, test, and use brain-computer interfaces in real and virtual environments. Presence-Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 19, 35–53 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science and Information TechnologyWest Pomeranian University of Technology SzczecinSzczecinPoland

Personalised recommendations