A Technical Seminar report on

BRAIN – COMPUTER INTERFACE

Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree in

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

BY

ANANTHA KISHORE REDDY

21675A1204

J.B.INISITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

AUTONOMOUS
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(Affiliated to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University)
Yenkapally (V), Moinabad (M).
R.R. (Dist) - 500075.
 J.B. INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
(UGC AUTONOMOUS)
(Accredited by NAAC, Permanently Affiliated to JNTUH)
Baskar Nagar,Yenkapally, Moinabad Mandal, R.R. Dist.Telangana(India) -500 075
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Accredited by NBA

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Technical Seminar report on “BRAIN – COMPUTER INTERFACE” is
a work done by ANANTHA KISHORE REDDY, 21675A1204 in partial fulfillment of the
requirement of the award for the degree of Bachelor of Technology in “Information Technology
“, during the academic year 2020-2024.

Head of the Department

Dr. S. Ravi Kumar
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I profoundly thank all my faculty members for their dynamic invaluable technical
guidance and constant encouragement without which the technical report would not have been
possible. I proudly thank Dr. S. Ravi Kumar, HOD of IT Department, for his support and Co-
operation for the completion of this report.

ANANTHA KISHORE REDDY

21675A1204
 CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE NO

Certificate I

Acknowledgement II

Abstract III

1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Scope of the system
1.3 Objectives
2. Algorithms / Techniques
3. Applications
4. Conclusion
5. References
 INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) are a rapidly evolving technology that has the potential to
revolutionize how humans interact with computers. BCIs measure brain activity and translate it
into commands for a computer or other device, allowing users to control machines and devices
using only their thoughts. Neurogadgets, ranging from moving robotic spiders and balls to more
practical applications, are increasingly being used for entertainment purposes. However, what is
more important is that neurogadgets are also being developed to assist people with disabilities,
such as those with paralysis of the limbs. BCIs are typically divided into unidirectional and
bidirectional categories based on the direction of their action. Unidirectional BCIs either receive
signals from the brain or send them to it, while bidirectional BCIs allow for information
exchange in both directions, enabling control of external devices by the brain. Research into
feedback methods is ongoing, with the aim of developing technologies that can transform
external commands into electrical signals transmitted via the nervous system. For instance, it
could be used to enable electrical stimulation of leg muscles in people with spinal cord injuries,
allowing them to regain mobility by controlling their movements through a tablet device . The
utilization of neural networks and other learning algorithms in signal processing is
commonplace, as brain activity varies between individuals. Consequently, these systems require
lengthy training sessions to enable the BCI to accurately interpret commands from a particular
user. The duration of the training depends on the number of commands received by BCI. While
this technology is still in its early stages of development, recent advances have shown great
promise for applications ranging from medical rehabilitation to gaming and entertainment. This
paper will provide an overview of the current state-of-the-art in BCI technologies, discussing
various platforms, techniques, and applications currently being explored.

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) aim at the non-invasive investigation of brain activity for
supporting communication and interaction of the users with their environment by means of
brain-machine assisted technologies. Despite technological progress and promising research
aimed at understanding the influence of human factors on BCI effectiveness, some topics still
remain unexplored. The aim of this article is to discuss why it is important to consider the
language of the user, its embodied grounding in perception, action and emotions, and its
interaction with cultural differences in information processing in future BCI research. Based on
evidence from recent studies, it is proposed that detection of language abilities and language
training are two main topics of enquiry of future BCI studies to extend communication among
vulnerable and healthy BCI users from bench to bedside and real world applications. In addition,
cultural differences shape perception, actions, cognition, language and emotions subjectively,
behaviorally as well as neuronally. Therefore, BCI applications should consider cultural
differences in information processing to develop culture- and language-sensitive BCI
applications for different user groups and BCIs, and investigate the linguistic and cultural
contexts in which the BCI will be used.

1.2 SCOPE OF THE SYSTEM

BCI-based technology for exchanging information between a human brain and a machine is
growing faster than we could imagine. Specifically, researchers are rapidly adapting noninvasive
techniques because of the ease of operation and application-friendly acquisition protocol.
However, the rate of information transfer is less than with the invasive technique. Predominantly,
the noninvasive technique is extremely helpful to work upon robotic devices where real-time
command and control is required. This application often requires a subject to move or relocate
from his position, which can be critical in the invasive technique. Movement of invasive
electrodes may create injuries. Therefore, the development of noninvasive techniques is being
done for several research areas. A noninvasive BCI signal suffers due to a low signal-to-noise
ratio, but as AI algorithms are improving, systems for EEG signal analysis are being trained to
obtain precise information from the input data. Although, acquired EEG signal is not only suffers
due to external noise, but also influenced by internal brain activities, such as event related
desynchronization. During this incident, sensory-motor related signals may get influenced by
thinking about the same event which is being performed. For instance, hands movement, some
time required to think about it, which causes decreasing the intensity of overall signal for that
particular task. In another case, when intensity will get increased, instead of decrement, then the
state of event related synchronization will appear. These problems are still not properly resolved,
just because they often depend on the subject being analyzed for BCI experiments.
These are just a few significant applications and benefits we have discussed in this chapter.
Many other applications can also be imagined, as the progress of AI for BCI will reach a certain
level. Issues and inefficiency in overall BCI systems will be reduced with time, but new
challenges may also be encountered with growing AI algorithms. In the near future, mental
health and the genuineness of brain signals can be the most prominent issues for this field.
However, with the help of microelectronics and advanced data processing techniques, BCI will
be significantly improved. BCI would be helpful to establish communication between remote
location machines, such as aircraft, robotic surgical arms, automotive vehicles, and huge
industrial manufacturing plants.
Broadly, a BCI (sometimes called a brain–machine interface, or BMI) measures brain
activity (either electrical, magnetic, or metabolic), transmits those signals to an external device,
and then initiates an action. BCIs are already being developed and used to restore
communication and motor functions to people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), spinal
cord injury, stroke, and locked-in syndrome; to help amputees control robotic arms; and more.
Most BCIs rely on electrodes to collect data on electrical currents and potentials in the brain,
although magnetic, acoustic, and infrared technologies also exist. Compared to electrodes placed
on the scalp, implanted BCIs are much closer to the neurons they aim to record and thus provide
a cleaner signal that is easier for a computer to decode and respond to. But they carry additional
challenges and risks, including specialized surgeons and the possibility of infection.“With every
solution, there’s some sort of tradeoff,” said Shadi Dayeh, Ph.D., a professor of electrical and
computer engineering at the Jacobs School of Engineering at the University of California, San
Diego (UCSD). “More invasive devices, such as those that penetrate the brain tissue, offer higher
resolution.”. The Utah array, which contains 100 electrodes and penetrates about 1 millimeter
into the cortex has been at the heart of many breakthroughs in the field so far. “We’re getting
great information by using several of these arrays spread across the cortex,” said Sydney Cash,
M.D., Ph.D., an associate professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School who is part of the
BrainGate consortium. “But the quantum leap we’re looking for is moving to thousands of
channels—perhaps a 50-fold increase in the number of neurons we’re recording from.”That
quantum leap looks increasingly possible, now that the semiconductor and telecommunications
industries have created high-density electrode arrays that can be produced at a relatively low
cost. Dayeh recently led the development of a new BCI that borrows fabrication techniques from
display screens. The device contains more than 4,000 channels and has flexible backing that can
conform to the brain’s 3D surface.Covering a larger area of the brain with a thin, flexible BCI
could ultimately allow scientists to decode brain activity using waves, rather than local electrical
potentials. Dayeh and his team first observed these signature patterns among patients in the
operating room at UCSD. Using a BCI with a few thousand channels, they had patients open and
close their hands, then detected waves of brain activity that bounced back and forth between the
motor and sensory cortices to coordinate the motion.

Apart from a few exceptions little BCI research appears to be available so far that would
have systematically examined human factors related to the user’s language or linguistic
competencies for their effects on BCI performance among healthy users and patient populations.
Such systematic research however is important to understand if language skills positively impact
BCI performance in healthy users and if a lack of these skills might contribute to the high BCI
illiteracy and BCI inefficiency rates reported among BCI users in previous studies (for BCI
illiteracy, e.g., Edlinger et al., 2015). This hypothesis is underscored by very recent reviews
about language abilities in cognitively severely impaired BCI users such as patients with
disorders of consciousness (DOC) (see Aubinet et al., 2022). The results imply that residual
implicit language abilities (i.e., cortical responses to specific words/sentences) are preserved in
about 33– 78% of patients with DOCs. Command following using braincomputer interfaces is
possible in about 20–50% of DOC patients and language abilities seem to improve during the
time course of the rehabilitation. Moreover, there is evidence that language competencies can be
improved by BCI-based training in patients with language or communicative impairments. A
number of previous studies provided very promising results in this direction. For example, a
recent study by Musso et al. (2022) found faster word processing after brain–computer interface-
based language training among stroke patients with mild to severe aphasia. After the training,
modulation of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) of aphasic patients accommodated to those
of healthy controls. Additionally, detailed linguistic assessment of the participants‘ language
abilities showed significant improvement after BCI training beyond spontaneous recovery rates
and beyond the trained task (for BCI use in patients with aphasia see also, e.g., Kleih et al., 2016
or for an overview and P300-BCIs, e.g., Fazel-Rezai et al., 2012).

The observations outlined above support the hypothesis to implement language

assessment and language training tools into the BCI applications, particularly for vulnerable
target groups. Theoretically, the paradigms included should allow for systematic EEG-based
testing of implicit and explicit language abilities. This should include aspects of language
comprehension or production on the word, phrase and sentence level, phonology, syntax and
morphology, imagery or command-following, respectively. Empirically, as summarized in Table
1, several paradigms from previous studies and reviewed previously (see Aubinet et al., 2022 for
DOC or Wilson et al., 2023 for EEG-based BCI datasets of semantic concepts) could provide a
good starting point for a standardized BCI language assessment battery. As proposed recently,
neurolinguistics provides a rich potential of paradigms based on EEG-ERP modulation that could
be used for both, BCIbased language assessment and BCI based language training among
vulnerable user groups (for a discussion, Leoni et al., 2021) and that may go beyond N400
modulation (Wilson et al., 2023). From an application perspective, several user groups with
cognitive- or language impairments including behaviorally unresponsive patient groups could
benefit from language sensitive BCIs. For example, if comprehension could be detected with a
passive BCI system in a particular patient, who might be showing electrophysiological signs of
semantic processing (N400 modulation) during language assessment, doctors and staff could be
informed about the appearance of changes from one state of consciousness to the other (Aubinet
et al., 2022). Next, a hybrid BCI could provide a means of communication and language training
in the event that signs of speech and language comprehension or signs of covert consciousness
are discovered during the EEG based language examination (for a discussion, see, e.g., Spataro
et al., 2022). The BCI paradigms should be linguistically multimodal to reduce barriers, false
classification and opt-out of patients due to sensory constraints and expressive restrictions in
many of the patient groups. Brain-computer interface based language training has been
conceptualized for applications for a broad range of users and contexts from bench to bedside. In
the future this could not only include BCI-based training of language disorders for bedside
training or for education in at-risk target groups with language disorders (for reviews
Papanastasiou et al., 2020), but include real world BCI scenarios such as BCI-based foreign
language learning among emerging adults and children in primary, secondary and/or tertiary
education (e.g., Raif et al., 2013; Lekova et al., 2018; Folgieri et al., 2020). In addition, language
training by BCIs could include non-invasive methods such as functional near infrared
spectroscopy (FNIRS), (e.g., Watanabe et al., 2016). Methodologically, for real-world BCI
applications, it has been suggested that natural language processing combined with artificial
intelligence offers great potential for shifting BCI communication from simple spelling and
passive language comprehension to more sophisticated applications such as the decoding of
continuous speech from cortical semantic representations of healthy users and BCI users from
the vulnerable user groups .

1.3.OBJECTIVES

The purpose of a BCI is to detect and quantify features of brain signals that indicate the
user's intentions and to translate these features in real time into device commands that
accomplish the user's intent (Figure 2). To achieve this, a BCI system consists of 4 sequential
components22: (1) signal acquisition, (2) feature extraction, (3) feature translation, and (4) device
output. These 4 components are controlled by an operating protocol that defines the onset and
timing of operation, the details of signal processing, the nature of the device commands, and the
oversight of performance. An effective operating protocol allows a BCI system to be flexible and
to serve the specific needs of each user.
 FIGURE 1

Components of a BCI system. Electrical signals from brain activity are detected by
recording electrodes located on the scalp, on the cortical surface, or within the brain. The brain
signals are amplified and digitized. Pertinent signal characteristics are extracted and then
translated into commands that control an output device, such as a spelling program, a motorized
wheelchair, or a prosthetic limb. Feedback from the device enables the user to modify the brain
signals in order to maintain effective device performance. BCI = brain-computer interface;
ECoG = electrocorticography; EEG = electroencephalography.
SIGNAL ACQUISITION

Signal acquisition is the measurement of brain signals using a particular sensor modality
(eg, scalp or intracranial electrodes for electrophysiologic activity, fMRI for metabolic activity).
The signals are amplified to levels suitable for electronic processing (and they may also be
subjected to filtering to remove electrical noise or other undesirable signal characteristics, such
as 60-Hz power line interference). The signals are then digitized and transmitted to a computer.

FEATURE EXTRACTION

Feature extraction is the process of analyzing the digital signals to distinguish pertinent
signal characteristics (ie, signal features related to the person's intent) from extraneous content
and representing them in a compact form suitable for translation into output commands. These
features should have strong correlations with the user's intent. Because much of the relevant (ie,
most strongly correlated) brain activity is either transient or oscillatory, the most commonly
extracted signal features in current BCI systems are time-triggered EEG or ECoG response
amplitudes and latencies, power within specific EEG or ECoG frequency bands, or firing rates of
individual cortical neurons. Environmental artifacts and physiologic artifacts such as
electromyographic signals are avoided or removed to ensure accurate measurement of the brain
signal features.

FEATURE TRANSLATION

The resulting signal features are then passed to the feature translation algorithm, which
converts the features into the appropriate commands for the output device (ie, commands that
accomplish the user's intent). For example, a power decrease in a given frequency band could be
translated into an upward displacement of a computer cursor, or a P300 potential could be
translated into selection of the letter that evoked it. The translation algorithm should be dynamic
to accommodate and adapt to spontaneous or learned changes in the signal features and to ensure
that the user's possible range of feature values covers the full range of device control.
DEVICE OUTPUT

The commands from the feature translation algorithm operate the external device,
providing functions such as letter selection, cursor control, robotic arm operation, and so forth.
The device operation provides feedback to the user, thus closing the control loop.
 2.BCI SIGNAL PROCESSING TECHNIQUES

A variety of signal processing techniques are employed when constructing a BCI system,
including feature extraction algorithms such as independent component analysis (ICA), wavelet
transformations, and autoregressive modeling; classification algorithms such as support vector
machines (SVM); pattern recognition approaches such as hidden Markov models; machine
learning models such as artificial neural networks; and optimization methods such as genetic
algorithms or particle swarm optimization. A key component of BCI’s signal processing is
synchronization and asynchronization, which are methods used to establish a connection between
the user’s brain signals and the computer system. Synchronization involves establishing an exact
match between two signals, while asynchronization involves allowing for some variation in
timing. Synchronization is typically used when there is an exact time relationship required
between two events or signals; this ensures that all data collected by one device is accurately
transferred to another device at exactly the same moment it was acquired from its source. This
type of synchronization requires precise timing control over both devices so that they remain
synchronized throughout the duration of the data transfer. To achieve this level of accuracy,
certain hardware components, such as clocks, must be employed to ensure accuracy over long
periods of time without drift occurring due to environmental factors such as temperature changes
or electrical interference from nearby devices. Synchronized data acquisition has been shown to
improve signal detection accuracy compared to non-synchronized techniques since any temporal
differences between acquisitions can be accounted for during analysis. Additionally,
synchronizing multiple channels allows EEG measures such as coherence values or event-related
potentials (ERPs) to be measured across different electrode sites within each channel .

2.1. ICA Use in BCI Systems

Independent component analysis (ICA) is a powerful statistical technique used to

identify and separate independent sources of information from data streams. It can be used in
brain–computer interface (BCI) systems to improve the accuracy of EEG signal processing by
separating useful signals from noise or artifacts. ICA helps extract meaningful information, such
as event-related potentials, which are then further processed for better understanding brain
activity patterns during tasks. Additionally, ICA can be used for artifact removal purposes,
allowing BCI applications to reduce false-positive detections caused by movement artifacts or
other interference signals. Independent Component Analysis (ICA) has been employed to
decompose multichannel datasets into independent components based on certain assumptions : -
The number of independent components must not exceed the number of electrodes used in
recording EEG signals; - Neuronal and artifact sources are considered to be linearly mixed yet
independent from each other; - A negligible signal propagation delay is assumed between brain
sources and electrodes. The objective of ICA is to identify a linear projection that maximizes
mutual independence, which can be mathematically expressed as: x(k) = As(k), k = 1, 2, 3, . . . ,
N, (1) where: x(k) ∈ After evaluating each wi , the independent components can be calculated
as: si(k) = Wx(k), W ≈ A −1 . (3) The ICA models utilized by algorithms such as Infomax,
JADE, FastICA, and RADICAL assume that the sources of independent components are either
non-Gaussian or a single source is Gaussian. These approaches do not consider the temporal
structure of the signal or extract components with a Gaussian distribution. To address this
limitation, time series-based ICA models implemented in TDSEP/SOBI, and AMUSE can select
independent components with a Gaussian distribution . Extended-Infomax ICA has the capacity
to remove both super-gaussian artifacts (eye blinks) and sub-gaussian signals (power noise
interference), whereas regular Infomax ICA is limited to the removal of super-gaussian artifacts
only. ICA algorithms have been found to have numerous drawbacks, including ambiguity
regarding the origin of sources, uncertainty with regards to component dispersion, and
dependence on data set size; in particular, ICA algorithms are characterized by inadequate
performance when operating on small data sets .

2.2. Neural Network Algorithms for BCI Systems

Machine learning models such as artificial neural networks (ANNs) are used in BCI
systems to help interpret and classify the brain signals that they receive. By utilizing ANNs, a
BCI system can be trained to recognize patterns in EEG data, which can then be used to detect
changes in states of consciousness or other types of mental activities. This allows BCI systems to
respond more accurately and quickly than traditional methods would allow. Additionally, by
using ANNs for pattern recognition tasks, it is possible for a BCI system to adapt over time as
new patterns emerge from the EEG data. This ability makes them especially useful for
applications involving long-term monitoring of patients with neurological disorders such as
epilepsy or dementia.

Convolutional neural networks (CNN) are most commonly used for this task. CNNs have
been proposed by LeCun as a type of artificial neural network architecture for efficient pattern
recognition in images. CNNs are composed of convolutional layers and pooling layers, which
enable the extraction of features from input data while reducing the amount of processed
information and preserving task-specific information. When working with EEG signals,
convolutional networks can be used to reduce the problem of image classification by feeding
spectrograms into their inputs. Alternatively, one may use an adaptation of the FBCSP method as
an input architecture; for example, ShallowNet is described in [93] and illustrated in Figure 4.
The layers composing this architecture and their respective functions are detailed as follows: A 1
× 25 time convolution is implemented to highlight characteristic peaks in the signal, followed by
a spatial filtering of all electrodes similar to that of the FBCSP algorithm. Subsequently, an
element-wise squaring is performed on the matrix values before proceeding with a 1 × 75
windowed time pooling operation, wherein the average value of each window element is taken.
A natural logarithm transformation then follows for each element, which is equivalent to
calculating the logarithm of signal dispersion as seen in FBCSP. Finally, these features are
classified by combining fully connected and softmax layers.

2.3. Genetic Algorithms and Particle Swarm Optimization in BCI

Genetic algorithms (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) are optimization
methods that can be used to optimize or tune the parameters of a BCI system. GA is an
evolutionary algorithm that uses concepts such as mutation, crossover, and selection to find
optimal solutions. PSO is an iterative algorithm inspired by social behavior in which particles
move around in search space with velocities that are influenced by their own best position and
the global best position found so far. Both algorithms can be used to automatically adjust model
parameters within a BCI system, thereby improving its performance. For example, they could be
used to optimize feature extraction techniques for EEG signals or adaptively select appropriate
stimuli for brain–computer interfaces based on user feedback. GAs use the principles of natural
selection and genetics to find solutions to complex optimization problems. They are used for
tasks such as finding the optimal parameters for a machine learning model or finding the shortest
route from one point to another in a network. GAs have been increasingly used in BCI systems
as they offer an effective way to optimize BCI performance by automatically searching through a
large space of potential parameter values and selecting those that yield better results [94–98]. As
advantages of Gas could be mentioned, their robustness. Gas are able to handle noise,
nonlinearities, and outliers without much difficulty. This makes them particularly well suited for
BCIs, where there is often considerable uncertainty due to biological variability between users or
individuals with different levels of expertise using the system. Another advantage is their
efficiency. Gas can be implemented quickly and easily compared to other optimization
techniques such as gradient descent or simulated annealing, making them ideal for realtime
applications such as online control systems where speed is essential. Finally, due to their
flexibility, GAs can be applied to many different types of problems, including classification,
regression, clustering, etc., making them applicable across many different domains within BCI
research
 3. APPLICATIONS

BCIs have been proposed for use in many fields, including medicine, neuroscience
research, education/training environments, human–computer interaction, and even
gaming/entertainment applications where users can control virtual objects using only their
thoughts without any physical movement required. In addition to these more traditional uses,
there is also ongoing work exploring new areas such as thought-controlled wheelchairs, which
allow disabled people greater freedom of mobility without relying on manual controls; prosthetic
devices enabling amputees to have better manipulation capabilities than ever before;
communication aids designed specifically for people suffering from severe speech impairments;
remote monitoring systems that track vital signs while allowing patients greater independence at
home rather than having them stay confined in hospitals; and even mind-controlled drones. The
possibilities seem endless when considering what could be achieved if we were able to
understand our brains better, so let us take a look at some examples where this technology has
already made an impact.

3.1. Neuroprosthetics
BCIs are being used to create neuroprosthetic devices, which allow people with physical
disabilities to control external devices such as wheelchairs and robotic arms using their own
brain signals. For example, the BrainGate neural interface system is a device that can be
implanted in the brain to record electrical activity from neurons and translate it into commands
for controlling external devices. The use of BCIs in neuroprosthetics is a rapidly growing field,
with potential applications ranging from restoring communication to those who have lost it due
to injury or illness to providing enhanced control of prosthetic limbs. BCI technology has been
used for decades in the medical sector but only recently began being applied to the development
of neuroprostheses.
One example of BCI technology being used in neuroprosthetics is brain-controlled
robotic arms and hands. These are designed to allow users with spinal cord injuries or
amputations to move their prosthetic limb by simply thinking about it, rather than having to
manually control it using switches or joysticks. This type of device can also be used as an
assistive tool for people with limited motor skills, such as stroke victims or those suffering from
degenerative diseases such as ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). By interpreting electrical
signals produced by neurons in the user’s brain, these devices can accurately predict what action
they should take when given input from the user, allowing them greater independence and
mobility. Another application for BCI technology within neuroprosthetics is its use in restoring
communication capabilities for those unable to speak due to paralysis caused by conditions such
as ALS, stroke, or traumatic brain injury. In this case, electrodes placed on the scalp detect
electrical activity produced by neurons that would normally be associated with speech
production and then translate this into words spoken through a computerized voice synthesizer.
This allows individuals who cannot physically produce sound themselves to still communicate
their thoughts and feelings without relying solely on writing them down or typing out messages
using eye-tracking software programs—enabling them much more freedom than before.
Overall, BCI technology is an exciting new field with a wide range of potential
applications within the realm of neuroprosthetics—from restoring communication capabilities to
providing enhanced control over prosthetic limbs and beyond. As research continues to progress
in this area, it can be expected that further advancements will be made that will allow individuals
with disabilities greater independence and mobility than ever before

3.2. Communication
BCI technology is also being used to develop new ways of communicating for people
who have lost the ability to speak or write due to paralysis or other conditions. For example, BCI
systems can be used to detect intentions from users’ brain signals and then convert them into text
messages or even speech output through computer algorithms. BCIs have become increasingly
popular in recent years as a way to enable communication between humans and machines. BCIs
are devices that measure brain activity, such as electrical signals from the brain, and then use this
information to control external objects or systems. BCIs can be used for a variety of applications,
including controlling prosthetics, medical diagnosis, rehabilitation therapy, gaming, robotics
control, and even communication.
This type of research is promising as it could be used to help people with disabilities who
cannot communicate verbally or physically due to paralysis or other conditions. Other studies
have looked into how BCI technology can be used for more complex forms of communication,
such as typing on a computer keyboard or giving speech commands via voice recognition
software. These types of applications could prove useful for helping individuals with severe
motor impairments regain some level of independence when communicating with others.
Additionally, there have also been attempts at developing interfaces that allow users to generate
language through thought alone using EEG recordings. While these technologies are still
relatively new and require further development before they can be widely adopted, they represent
an exciting potential future application for augmenting human-machine interaction via BCI
technology. Overall, BCI technology has the potential to revolutionize communication as we
know it. While there is still a lot of research and development needed before this technology can
be widely adopted, the potential for enabling individuals with disabilities to communicate more
effectively or even generate language through thought alone is an exciting prospect.

3.3. Gaming
BCIs are increasingly being used in gaming applications where players can interact with
virtual environments using only their thoughts instead of traditional controllers such as
keyboards and joysticks. One example of a game that utilizes BCI is MindRDR, developed by
the Londonbased startup This Place [143]. The game uses EEG sensors to measure players’
emotional responses while playing. Players use their mental focus or concentration levels to
control the direction and speed of an avatar on screen. As players become more emotionally
engaged with the game, their avatar will move faster and farther across the screen than if they
were not as focused or engaged with it. Another example of a BCI-enabled video game is Brain
Wars from NeuroSky Inc., which allows players to compete against each other using EEG
headsets to measure brainwaves associated with concentration levels during gameplay . Players
must concentrate hard enough so that their brain waves reach certain thresholds in order to be
able to progress through different levels in the game. In addition, there are several research
projects underway exploring how BCIs can be used for virtual reality gaming experiences.
3.4. Education
BCIs are being used to enhance the learning experience by providing real-time feedback
about students’ cognitive states and helping them focus better on their studies. This technology
has been used in various ways for educational purposes, ranging from helping students with
special needs learn how to control their movements and communicate effectively to providing
more immersive learning experiences for all learners . Research on the use of BCI in education
has shown positive results when it comes to improving student engagement and motivation. For
example, one study found that using BCI-based games improved cognitive skills among students
who had difficulty paying attention during traditional classroom activities. Additionally, research
suggests that BCI can be used as an effective tool for teaching abstract concepts such as
mathematics or foreign languages by allowing users to directly experience the material instead of
relying solely on verbal instruction. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that the use of BCIs
can reduce stress levels among students by providing them with a more natural way of
interacting with computers than conventional input devices such as keyboards or mice. Finally,
research indicates that BCIs may provide new opportunities for personalized learning since they
allow teachers to tailor lesson plans according to individual students strengths and weaknesses
based on real-time feedback from brain activity data. Overall, research suggests that BCI
technology has the potential to revolutionize education by providing more engaging and
immersive learning experiences for students of all ages.

3.5. Mental Health

BCI technology is also being explored as a potential treatment for mental health
conditions such as depression, anxiety, and addiction by allowing clinicians to monitor patients’
brain activity in real time and provide targeted interventions when required . In mental health
care, BCI can be used to assess cognitive processes such as attention and memory; detect
changes in emotional states; monitor progress in therapy; measure levels of stress or relaxation;
provide feedback during biofeedback exercises; diagnose neurological disorders such as
Alzheimer’s disease or Parkinson’s disease; improve motor skills after stroke or traumatic brain
injury (TBI); help people suffering from depression manage their symptoms through self-
regulation techniques; reduce anxiety associated with public speaking; and more. In addition,
BCIs have been shown to be effective tools for helping patients develop better coping skills
when dealing with difficult emotions such as anger or fear. Research suggests that BCI could
potentially revolutionize how we approach mental healthcare by allowing us to quickly identify
psychological problems at an early stage and intervene before they become serious issues. For
example, some research has suggested that EEG-based BCIs may be able to detect subtle signs of
distress related to depression that would not normally be picked up by traditional methods of
assessment such as questionnaires or interviews alone. Other research has demonstrated how
portable EEG systems can be used in real-time settings outside of a clinical environment,
providing clinicians with valuable information about the patient’s condition without having the
patient physically present in front of them.
 CONCLUSION

Many researchers throughout the world are developing BCI systems that a few years ago
were in the realm of science fiction. These systems use different brain signals, recording
methods, and signal-processing algorithms. They can operate many different devices, from
cursors on computer screens to wheelchairs to robotic arms. A few people with severe
disabilities are already using a BCI for basic communication and control in their daily lives. With
better signal-acquisition hardware, clear clinical validation, viable dissemination models, and,
probably most important, increased reliability, BCIs may become a major new communication
and control technology for people with disabilities—and possibly for the general population also.
 REFERENCES

1. Mridha, M.F.; Das, S.C.; Kabir, M.M.; Lima, A.A.; Islam, M.R.; Watanobe, Y. Brain-
Computer Interface: Advancement and Challenges. Sensors 2021, 21, 5746. [CrossRef]
2. Mora-Cortes, A.; Manyakov, N.V.; Chumerin, N.; Van Hulle, M.M. Language Model
Applications to Spelling with Brain-Computer Interfaces. Sensors 2014, 14, 5967–5993.
[CrossRef]
3. Belwafi, K.; Gannouni, S.; Aboalsamh, H. Embedded Brain Computer Interface: State-of-the-
Art in Research. Sensors 2021, 21, 4293. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Värbu, K.; Muhammad, N.; Muhammad, Y. Past, Present, and Future of EEG-Based BCI
Applications. Sensors 2022, 22, 3331. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Siribunyaphat, N.; Punsawad, Y. Brain–Computer Interface Based on Steady-State Visual
Evoked Potential Using Quick-Response Code Pattern for Wheelchair Control. Sensors 2023, 23,
2069. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Xie, Y.; Oniga, S. Classification of Motor Imagery EEG Signals Based on Data Augmentation
and Convolutional Neural Networks. Sensors 2023, 23, 1932. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Tsiamalou, A.; Dardiotis, E.; Paterakis, K.; Fotakopoulos, G.; Liampas, I.; Sgantzos, M.;
Siokas, V.; Brotis, A.G. EEG in Neurorehabilitation: A Bibliometric Analysis and Content
Review. Neurol. Int. 2022, 14, 1046–1061. [CrossRef]
8. Saichoo, T.; Boonbrahm, P.; Punsawad, Y. Investigating User Proficiency of Motor Imagery
for EEG-Based BCI System to Control Simulated Wheelchair. Sensors 2022, 22, 9788.
[CrossRef]
9. Abdullah; Faye, I.; Islam, M.R. EEG Channel Selection Techniques in Motor Imagery
Applications: A Review and New Perspectives. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 726. [CrossRef]
10. Gannouni, S.; Belwafi, K.; Al-Sulmi, M.R.; Al-Farhood, M.D.; Al-Obaid, O.A.; Al-Awadh,
A.M.; Aboalsamh, H.; Belghith, A. A Brain Controlled Command-Line Interface to Enhance the
Accessibility of Severe Motor Disabled People to Personnel Computer. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 926.
[CrossRef]
11. Asanza, V.; Peláez, E.; Loayza, F.; Lorente-Leyva, L.L.; Peluffo-Ordóñez, D.H.
Identification of Lower-Limb Motor Tasks via Brain–Computer Interfaces: A Topical Overview.
Sensors 2022, 22, 2028. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Singh, S.P.; Mishra, S.; Gupta, S.; Padmanabhan, P.; Jia, L.; Colin, T.K.A.; Tsai, Y.T.; Kejia,
T.; Sankarapillai, P.; Mohan, A.; et al. Functional Mapping of the Brain for Brain–Computer
Interfacing: A Review. Electronics 2023, 12, 604. [CrossRef]
13. He, Z.; Li, Z.; Yang, F.; Wang, L.; Li, J.; Zhou, C.; Pan, J. Advances in Multimodal Emotion
Recognition Based on Brain–Computer Interfaces. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 687. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
14. Orban, M.; Elsamanty, M.; Guo, K.; Zhang, S.; Yang, H. A Review of Brain Activity and
EEG-Based Brain–Computer Interfaces for Rehabilitation Application. Bioengineering 2022, 9,
768. [CrossRef]
15. Park, J.; Park, J.; Shin, D.; Choi, Y. A BCI Based Alerting System for Attention Recovery of
UAV Operators. Sensors 2021, 21, 2447. [CrossRef]
16. Yang, L.; Van Hulle, M.M. Real-Time Navigation in Google Street View® Using a Motor
Imagery-Based BCI. Sensors 2023, 23, 1704. [CrossRef]
17. Amprimo, G.; Rechichi, I.; Ferraris, C.; Olmo, G. Measuring Brain Activation Patterns from
Raw Single-Channel EEG during Exergaming: A Pilot Study. Electronics 2023, 12, 623.
[CrossRef]
18. Glavas, K.; Prapas, G.; Tzimourta, K.D.; Giannakeas, N.; Tsipouras, M.G. Evaluation of the
User Adaptation in a BCI Game Environment. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 12722. [CrossRef]
19. Chang, D.; Xiang, Y.; Zhao, J.; Qian, Y.; Li, F. Exploration of Brain-Computer Interaction
for Supporting Children’s Attention Training: A Multimodal Design Based on Attention
Network and Gamification Design. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15046.
[CrossRef]
20. Knierim, M.T.; Bleichner, M.G.; Reali, P. A Systematic Comparison of High-End and Low-
Cost EEG Amplifiers for Concealed, Around-the-Ear EEG Recordings. Sensors 2023, 23, 4559.
[CrossRef]
21. Ferracuti, F.; Iarlori, S.; Mansour, Z.; Monteriù, A.; Porcaro, C. Comparing between
Different Sets of Preprocessing, Classifiers, and Channels Selection Techniques to Optimise
Motor Imagery Pattern Classification System from EEG Pattern Recognition. Brain Sci. 2022,
12, 57. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Baradaran, F.; Farzan, A.; Danishvar, S.; Sheykhivand, S. Customized 2D CNN Model for
the Automatic Emotion Recognition Based on EEG Signals. Electronics 2023, 12, 2232.
[CrossRef]
23. Wang, Y.; Song, C.; Zhang, T.; Yao, Z.; Chang, Z.; Wang, D. Feature Extraction of Motor
Imagery EEG via Discrete Wavelet Transform and Generalized Maximum Fuzzy Membership
Difference Entropy: A Comparative Study. Electronics 2023, 12, 2207. [CrossRef]
24. Ortega-Rodríguez, J.; Gómez-González, J.F.; Pereda, E. Selection of the Minimum Number
of EEG Sensors to Guarantee Biometric Identification of Individuals. Sensors 2023, 23, 4239.
[CrossRef]
25. Cardona-Álvarez, Y.N.; Álvarez-Meza, A.M.; Cárdenas-Peña, D.A.; Castaño-Duque, G.A.;
Castellanos-Dominguez, G. A Novel OpenBCI Framework for EEG-Based Neurophysiological
Experiments. Sensors 2023, 23, 3763. [CrossRef]
26. Saibene, A.; Caglioni, M.; Corchs, S.; Gasparini, F. EEG-Based BCIs on Motor Imagery
Paradigm Using Wearable Technologies: A Systematic Review. Sensors 2023, 23, 2798.
[CrossRef]
27. Ali, M.U.; Kim, K.S.; Kallu, K.D.; Zafar, A.; Lee, S.W. OptEF-BCI: An Optimization-Based
Hybrid EEG and fNIRS–Brain Computer Interface. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 608. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
28. Zafar, A.; Hussain, S.J.; Ali, M.U.; Lee, S.W. Metaheuristic Optimization-Based Feature
Selection for Imagery and Arithmetic Tasks: An fNIRS Study. Sensors 2023, 23, 3714.
[CrossRef]
29. Erdo ˘gan, S.B.; Yükselen, G. Four-Class Classification of Neuropsychiatric Disorders by
Use of Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Derived Biomarkers. Sensors 2022, 22, 5407.
[CrossRef]
30. Varandas, R.; Lima, R.; Bermúdez I Badia, S.; Silva, H.; Gamboa, H. Automatic Cognitive
Fatigue Detection Using Wearable fNIRS and Machine Learning. Sensors 2022, 22, 4010.
[CrossRef]
31. Zapała, D.; Augustynowicz, P.; Tokovarov, M. Recognition of Attentional States in VR
Environment: An fNIRS Study. Sensors 2022, 22, 3133. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Gulraiz, A.; Naseer, N.; Nazeer, H.; Khan, M.J.; Khan, R.A.; Shahbaz Khan, U. LASSO
Homotopy-Based Sparse Representation Classification for fNIRS-BCI. Sensors 2022, 22, 2575.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Hamid, H.; Naseer, N.; Nazeer, H.; Khan, M.J.; Khan, R.A.; Shahbaz Khan, U. Analyzing
Classification Performance of fNIRS-BCI for Gait Rehabilitation Using Deep Neural Networks.
Sensors 2022, 22, 1932. [CrossRef]
34. McClay, W. A Magnetoencephalographic/Encephalographic (MEG/EEG) Brain-Computer
Interface Driver for Interactive iOS Mobile Videogame Applications Utilizing the Hadoop
Ecosystem, MongoDB, and Cassandra NoSQL Databases. Diseases 2018, 6, 89. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
35. Reichert, C.; Dürschmid, S.; Kruse, R.; Hinrichs, H. An Efficient Decoder for the
Recognition of Event-Related Potentials in High-Density MEG Recordings. Computers 2016, 5,
5. [CrossRef]
36. Dash, D.; Ferrari, P.; Dutta, S.; Wang, J. NeuroVAD: Real-Time Voice Activity Detection
from Non-Invasive Neuromagnetic Signals. Sensors 2020, 20, 2248. [CrossRef]
37. Xu, F.; Rong, F.; Miao, Y.; Sun, Y.; Dong, G.; Li, H.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Leng, J.
Representation Learning for Motor Imagery Recognition with Deep Neural Network. Electronics
2021, 10, 112. [CrossRef]
38. Shokoueinejad, M.; Park, D.-W.; Jung, Y.H.; Brodnick, S.K.; Novello, J.; Dingle, A.;
Swanson, K.I.; Baek, D.-H.; Suminski, A.J.; Lake, W.B.; et al. Progress in the Field of Micro-
Electrocorticography. Micromachines 2019, 10, 62. [CrossRef]
39. Tasnim, N.; Ajam, A.; Ramos, R.; Koripalli, M.K.; Chennamsetti, M.; Choi, Y. Handcrafted
Electrocorticography Electrodes for a Rodent Behavioral Model. Technologies 2016, 4, 23.
[CrossRef]
40. Wolpaw, J.R.; McFarland, D.J.; Neat, G.W.; Forneris, C.A. An EEG-based brain-computer
interface for cursor control. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1991, 78, 252–259.
[CrossRef]