Dimensionality Transcending: A Method for Merging BCI Datasets With Different Dimensionalities

Objective: We present a transfer learning method for datasets with different dimensionalities, coming from different experimental setups but representing the same physical phenomena. We focus on the case where the data points are symmetric positive definite (SPD) matrices describing the statistical behavior of EEG-based brain computer interfaces (BCI). Method: Our proposal uses a two-step procedure that transforms the data points so that they become matched in terms of dimensionality and statistical distribution. In the dimensionality matching step, we use isometric transformations to map each dataset into a common space without changing their geometric structures. The statistical matching is done using a domain adaptation technique adapted for the intrinsic geometry of the space where the datasets are defined. Results: We illustrate our proposal on time series obtained from BCI systems with different experimental setups (e.g., different number of electrodes, different placement of electrodes). The results show that the proposed method can be used to transfer discriminative information between BCI recordings that, in principle, would be incompatible. Conclusion and significance: Such findings pave the way to a new generation of BCI systems capable of reusing information and learning from several sources of data despite differences in their electrodes positioning.

[1]  Christa Neuper,et al.  Autocalibration and Recurrent Adaptation: Towards a Plug and Play Online ERD-BCI , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[2]  Gilles Louppe,et al.  Robust EEG-based cross-site and cross-protocol classification of states of consciousness , 2018, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[3]  Ronen Talmon,et al.  Parallel Transport on the Cone Manifold of SPD Matrices for Domain Adaptation , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[4]  Ronald Phlypo,et al.  Fixed Point Algorithms for Estimating Power Means of Positive Definite Matrices , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[5]  Ivor W. Tsang,et al.  Domain Adaptation via Transfer Component Analysis , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks.

[6]  Pierre-Antoine Absil,et al.  Matrix geometric means based on shuffled inductive sequences , 2017 .

[7]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Covariate Shift Adaptation by Importance Weighted Cross Validation , 2007, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[8]  Alexandre Barachant,et al.  A New Generation of Brain-Computer Interface Based on Riemannian Geometry , 2013, ArXiv.

[9]  Laurent Grisoni,et al.  HABILITATION A DIRIGER DES RECHERCHES , 2005 .

[10]  S. Holm A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[11]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  A Kernel Two-Sample Test , 2012, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[12]  Maher Moakher,et al.  A Differential Geometric Approach to the Geometric Mean of Symmetric Positive-Definite Matrices , 2005, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl..

[13]  F. Yger,et al.  Riemannian Approaches in Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Review , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[14]  F. Barbaresco Innovative tools for radar signal processing Based on Cartan’s geometry of SPD matrices & Information Geometry , 2008, 2008 IEEE Radar Conference.

[15]  Marc Arnaudon,et al.  Riemannian Medians and Means With Applications to Radar Signal Processing , 2013, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing.

[16]  Vinay Jayaram,et al.  MOABB: trustworthy algorithm benchmarking for BCIs , 2018, Journal of neural engineering.

[17]  Bangyan Zhou,et al.  A Fully Automated Trial Selection Method for Optimization of Motor Imagery Based Brain-Computer Interface , 2016, PloS one.

[18]  F. Perrin,et al.  Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  Guillermo Sapiro,et al.  Comparing point clouds , 2004, SGP '04.

[20]  Christian Jutten,et al.  Riemannian Procrustes Analysis: Transfer Learning for Brain–Computer Interfaces , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  Mehrtash Harandi,et al.  Dimensionality Reduction on SPD Manifolds: The Emergence of Geometry-Aware Methods , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[22]  Martin Luessi,et al.  MEG and EEG data analysis with MNE-Python , 2013, Front. Neuroinform..

[23]  Christian Jutten,et al.  Multivariate Time-Series Analysis Via Manifold Learning , 2018, 2018 IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP).

[24]  Ann B. Lee,et al.  Diffusion maps and coarse-graining: a unified framework for dimensionality reduction, graph partitioning, and data set parameterization , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[25]  Gael Varoquaux,et al.  Manifold-regression to predict from MEG/EEG brain signals without source modeling , 2019, NeurIPS.

[26]  D. Kendall A Survey of the Statistical Theory of Shape , 1989 .

[27]  D. Zaykin,et al.  Optimally weighted Z‐test is a powerful method for combining probabilities in meta‐analysis , 2011, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[28]  Marco Congedo,et al.  Building Brain Invaders: EEG data of an experimental validation , 2019, ArXiv.

[29]  Xavier Pennec,et al.  Intrinsic Statistics on Riemannian Manifolds: Basic Tools for Geometric Measurements , 2006, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[30]  Alexandre Barachant,et al.  Riemannian geometry for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces; a primer and a review , 2017 .

[31]  Nicolas Courty,et al.  Optimal Transport for Domain Adaptation , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[32]  R. Bhatia Positive Definite Matrices , 2007 .

[33]  Qiang Yang,et al.  A Survey on Transfer Learning , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[34]  M Congedo,et al.  A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain–computer interfaces: a 10 year update , 2018, Journal of neural engineering.

[35]  Christian Jutten,et al.  Multiclass Brain–Computer Interface Classification by Riemannian Geometry , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[36]  Marco Congedo,et al.  EEG Source Analysis , 2013 .

[37]  Christian Jutten,et al.  Dimensionality Reduction for BCI Classification using Riemannian Geometry , 2017, GBCIC.

[38]  H. Karcher Riemannian center of mass and mollifier smoothing , 1977 .

[39]  Christian Jutten,et al.  "When does it work ?" : An exploratory analysis of Transfer Learning for BCI , 2019, GBCIC.

[40]  Eugene S. Edgington,et al.  Randomization Tests , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[41]  Baba C. Vemuri,et al.  Gaussian Distributions on Riemannian Symmetric Spaces: Statistical Learning With Structured Covariance Matrices , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[42]  Alexandre Barachant,et al.  Brain Invaders Adaptive versus Non-Adaptive P300 Brain-Computer Interface dataset , 2019, ArXiv.

[43]  F Cincotti,et al.  Influence of P300 latency jitter on event related potential-based brain–computer interface performance , 2014, Journal of neural engineering.