NM000199: eeg dataset, 13 subjects#
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP)
Citation: David Hübner, Thibault Verhoeven, Konstantin Schmid, Klaus-Robert Müller, Michael Tangermann, Pieter-Jan Kindermans (2017). Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP).
13-participant EEG dataset — Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP).
Quickstart#
Install
pip install eegdash
Access the data
from eegdash.dataset import NM000199
dataset = NM000199(cache_dir="./data")
# Get the raw object of the first recording
raw = dataset.datasets[0].raw
print(raw.info)
Filter by subject
dataset = NM000199(cache_dir="./data", subject="01")
Advanced query
dataset = NM000199(
cache_dir="./data",
query={"subject": {"$in": ["01", "02"]}},
)
Iterate recordings
for rec in dataset:
print(rec.subject, rec.raw.info['sfreq'])
If you use this dataset in your research, please cite the original authors.
BibTeX
@dataset{nm000199,
title = {Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP)},
author = {David Hübner and Thibault Verhoeven and Konstantin Schmid and Klaus-Robert Müller and Michael Tangermann and Pieter-Jan Kindermans},
}
About This Dataset#
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP) dataset from Hübner et al 2017 [1]_.
Schema: HED 8.4.0 | Browse: https://www.hedtags.org/hed-schema-browser
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP)
Target
├─ Sensory-event
├─ Experimental-stimulus
View full README
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP)
Target
├─ Sensory-event
├─ Experimental-stimulus
├─ Visual-presentation
└─ Target
NonTarget
├─ Sensory-event
├─ Experimental-stimulus
├─ Visual-presentation
└─ Non-target
Paradigm-Specific Parameters
Detected paradigm: p300
Number of targets: 42
Stimulus onset asynchrony: 250.0 ms
Data Structure
Trials: 12852
Trials context: 68 highlighting events per character, 63 characters per sentence, 3 sentences = 68*63*3 = 12852 EEG epochs per subject. Each epoch is a Target (10002) or NonTarget (10001) event.
Preprocessing
Data state: raw
Preprocessing applied: False
Signal Processing
Classifiers: LLP (Learning from Label Proportions), shrinkage-LDA, EM-algorithm
Feature extraction: mean amplitude per time interval
Frequency bands: analyzed=[0.5, 8.0] Hz
Cross-Validation
Method: 5-fold chronological cross-validation
Folds: 5
Evaluation type: within_subject
Performance (Original Study)
Accuracy: 84.5%
Auc: 0.975
Online Spelling Accuracy: 84.5
Post Hoc Spelling Accuracy: 95.0
Accuracy After Rampup: 90.2
Supervised Auc: 0.975
Max Spelling Speed Chars Per Min: 2.4
BCI Application
Applications: speller, communication
Environment: laboratory
Online feedback: True
Tags
Pathology: Healthy
Modality: Visual
Type: Research
Documentation
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175856
License: CC-BY-4.0
Investigators: David Hübner, Thibault Verhoeven, Konstantin Schmid, Klaus-Robert Müller, Michael Tangermann, Pieter-Jan Kindermans
Senior author: Michael Tangermann
Contact: david.huebner@blbt.uni-freiburg.de; michael.tangermann@blbt.uni-freiburg.de; p.kindermans@tu-berlin.de
Institution: Albert-Ludwigs-University
Department: Brain State Decoding Lab, Cluster of Excellence BrainLinks-BrainTools, Department of Computer Science
Address: Freiburg, Germany
Country: DE
Repository: Zenodo
Data URL: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.192684
Publication year: 2017
Funding: BrainLinks-BrainTools Cluster of Excellence funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), grant number EXC 1086; bwHPC initiative, grant INST 39/963-1 FUGG; European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 657679; Special Research Fund from Ghent University; BK21 program funded by Korean National Research Foundation grant No. 2012-005741
Ethics approval: Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Freiburg; Declaration of Helsinki
Keywords: brain-computer interface, BCI, event-related potentials, ERP, P300, learning from label proportions, LLP, unsupervised learning, calibrationless, visual speller
Abstract
Using traditional approaches, a brain-computer interface (BCI) requires the collection of calibration data for new subjects prior to online use. This work introduces learning from label proportions (LLP) to the BCI community as a new unsupervised, and easy-to-implement classification approach for ERP-based BCIs. The LLP estimates the mean target and non-target responses based on known proportions of these two classes in different groups of the data. We present a visual ERP speller to meet the requirements of LLP. For evaluation, we ran simulations on artificially created data sets and conducted an online BCI study with 13 subjects performing a copy-spelling task. Theoretical considerations show that LLP is guaranteed to minimize the loss function similar to a corresponding supervised classifier. LLP performed well in simulations and in the online application, where 84.5% of characters were spelled correctly on average without prior calibration.
Methodology
The experiment used a modified visual ERP speller with a 6×7 grid. Two distinct stimulus sequences with different target/non-target ratios were used: sequence 1 had 3 targets in 8 stimuli, sequence 2 had 2 targets in 18 stimuli. Each trial consisted of 4 sequences of length 8 and 2 sequences of length 18, totaling 68 highlighting events per character. The LLP algorithm exploited these known proportions to reconstruct mean target and non-target ERP responses without requiring labeled data. The classifier was reset at the start of each sentence and retrained after each character. Subjects spelled a German pangram sentence three times. One subject (S2) had prior EEG experience; others were naive. Sessions lasted about 3 hours including setup. Participants were compensated 8 Euros per hour.
References
Hübner, D., Verhoeven, T., Schmid, K., Müller, K. R., Tangermann, M., & Kindermans, P. J. (2017) Learning from label proportions in brain-computer interfaces: Online unsupervised learning with guarantees. PLOS ONE 12(4): e0175856. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175856 .. versionadded:: 0.4.5 Appelhoff, S., Sanderson, M., Brooks, T., Vliet, M., Quentin, R., Holdgraf, C., Chaumon, M., Mikulan, E., Tavabi, K., Hochenberger, R., Welke, D., Brunner, C., Rockhill, A., Larson, E., Gramfort, A. and Jas, M. (2019). MNE-BIDS: Organizing electrophysiological data into the BIDS format and facilitating their analysis. Journal of Open Source Software 4: (1896). https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01896 Pernet, C. R., Appelhoff, S., Gorgolewski, K. J., Flandin, G., Phillips, C., Delorme, A., Oostenveld, R. (2019). EEG-BIDS, an extension to the brain imaging data structure for electroencephalography. Scientific Data, 6, 103. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0104-8 Generated by MOABB 1.5.0 (Mother of All BCI Benchmarks) NeuroTechX/moabb
Cohort#
Dataset Statistics#
Age distribution by gender (n=13, range 26–26 yr, mean 26.0 yr)
Channel counts: 31 ch (n=342 recordings)
Sampling frequencies: 1000.0 Hz (n=342 recordings)
Total recording duration: 16 h 24 min
Signal · Electrodes & live trace#
Live trace viewer — sub-13 · ses-2 · task-p300 · run-4
Showing one representative recording out of
13 subjects and 342 recordings in this dataset.
Browse the full set on OpenNeuro;
drop any other _eeg.{set,edf,bdf,vhdr} file onto the
viewer (or pass ?eeg=<url>) to inspect it.
Electrode layout — EEG · 31 sensors — 31 channels
NEMAR Processing Statistics#
The plots below are generated by NEMAR’s automated EEG pipeline. The histogram shows pipeline success for data cleaning and ICA decomposition, the percentage of data frames and EEG channels retained after artefact removal, line noise per channel (RMS, dB), and the age/gender distribution of participants.
HED event descriptors word cloud
Manifest#
File Explorer#
Browse the BIDS file structure of this dataset. Records are fetched on demand from the EEGDash catalog the first time you open the explorer.
Full dataset metadata table
Dataset ID |
|
Title |
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP) |
Author (year) |
|
Canonical |
— |
Importable as |
|
Year |
2017 |
Authors |
David Hübner, Thibault Verhoeven, Konstantin Schmid, Klaus-Robert Müller, Michael Tangermann, Pieter-Jan Kindermans |
License |
CC-BY-4.0 |
Citation / DOI |
Unknown |
Source links |
OpenNeuro | NeMAR | Source URL |
API Reference#
eegdash.datasetEEGDashDatasetNM000199 · Hubner2017eegdash/dataset/registry.py · [source ↗]- class eegdash.dataset.NM000199(cache_dir: str, query: dict | None = None, s3_bucket: str | None = None, **kwargs)[source]#
Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP)
- Study:
nm000199(NeMAR)- Author (year):
Hubner2017- Canonical:
—
Also importable as:
NM000199,Hubner2017.Modality:
eeg; Experiment type:Attention; Subject type:Healthy. Subjects: 13; recordings: 342; tasks: 1.- Parameters:
cache_dir (str | Path) – Directory where data are cached locally.
query (dict | None) – Additional MongoDB-style filters to AND with the dataset selection. Must not contain the key
dataset.s3_bucket (str | None) – Base S3 bucket used to locate the data.
**kwargs (dict) – Additional keyword arguments forwarded to
EEGDashDataset.
- data_dir#
Local dataset cache directory (
cache_dir / dataset_id).- Type:
Path
Notes
Each item is a recording; recording-level metadata are available via
dataset.description.querysupports MongoDB-style filters on fields inALLOWED_QUERY_FIELDSand is combined with the dataset filter. Dataset-specific caveats are not provided in the summary metadata.References
OpenNeuro dataset: https://openneuro.org/datasets/nm000199 NeMAR dataset: https://nemar.org/dataexplorer/detail?dataset_id=nm000199
Examples
>>> from eegdash.dataset import NM000199 >>> dataset = NM000199(cache_dir="./data") >>> recording = dataset[0] >>> raw = recording.load()
- __init__(cache_dir: str, query: dict | None = None, s3_bucket: str | None = None, **kwargs)[source]#
- save(path: str, overwrite: bool = False, offset: int = 0)[source]#
Save datasets to files by creating one subdirectory for each dataset:
path/ 0/ 0-raw.fif | 0-epo.fif description.json raw_preproc_kwargs.json (if raws were preprocessed) window_kwargs.json (if this is a windowed dataset) window_preproc_kwargs.json (if windows were preprocessed) target_name.json (if target_name is not None and dataset is raw) 1/ 1-raw.fif | 1-epo.fif description.json raw_preproc_kwargs.json (if raws were preprocessed) window_kwargs.json (if this is a windowed dataset) window_preproc_kwargs.json (if windows were preprocessed) target_name.json (if target_name is not None and dataset is raw)
- Parameters:
path (str) –
- Directory in which subdirectories are created to store
-raw.fif | -epo.fif and .json files to.
overwrite (bool) – Whether to delete old subdirectories that will be saved to in this call.
offset (int) – If provided, the integer is added to the id of the dataset in the concat. This is useful in the setting of very large datasets, where one dataset has to be processed and saved at a time to account for its original position.
BaseDataset from braindecode — windowed via create_windows_from_events.braindecodeDataLoader; supports parallel workers and on-the-fly augmentations.pytorchSwap any load_dataset(...) call for nm000199 to reproduce the tutorial on this dataset.
Citation
David Hübner, Thibault Verhoeven, Konstantin Schmid, Klaus-Robert Müller, Michael Tangermann, … (2017). Learning from label proportions for a visual matrix speller (ERP).
Provenance
¹Contributed to nemar in BIDS format.
²Curated & ingested by the EEGDash catalog; see CITATION.cff for canonical reference.
Related & sibling datasets
+ 1 more — see See Also below →
See Also#
eegdash.dataset.EEGDashDataseteegdash.dataset