It has been almost 50 years since the term“brain–computer interface”(BCI)was first proposed by Jacques J.Vidal in 1973[1].Unlike traditional electronic interfaces that transmit nonliving information between devices...It has been almost 50 years since the term“brain–computer interface”(BCI)was first proposed by Jacques J.Vidal in 1973[1].Unlike traditional electronic interfaces that transmit nonliving information between devices,BCIs set up a communication bridge between a living brain and nonliving devices.Technically speaking,a BCI is a system that measures brain activity and converts it into the artificial outputs that replace,restore,enhance,supplement,or improve the natural central nervous system outputs[2].At present,electroencephalography(EEG)is the most commonly used brain signal for BCIs.展开更多
The brain function of prediction is fundamental for human beings to shape perceptions efficiently and successively. Through decades of effort, a valuable brain activation map has been obtained for prediction. However,...The brain function of prediction is fundamental for human beings to shape perceptions efficiently and successively. Through decades of effort, a valuable brain activation map has been obtained for prediction. However,much less is known about how the brain manages the prediction process over time using traditional neuropsychological paradigms. Here, we implemented an innovative paradigm for timing prediction to precisely study the temporal dynamics of neural oscillations. In the experiment recruiting 45 participants, expectation suppression was found for the overall electroencephalographic activity,consistent with previous hemodynamic studies. Notably,we found that N1 was positively associated with predictability while N2 showed a reversed relation to predictability. Furthermore, the matching prediction had a similar profile with no timing prediction, both showing an almost saturated N1 and an absence of N2. The results indicate that the N1 process showed a ‘sharpening' effect for predictable inputs, while the N2 process showed a‘dampening' effect. Therefore, these two paradoxical neural effects of prediction, which have provoked wide confusion in accounting for expectation suppression,actually co-exist in the procedure of timing prediction but work in separate time windows. These findings strongly support a recently-proposed opposing process theory.展开更多
基金We appreciate the financial support from the National Key Research and Development Program of China(2017YFB1300300)the National Natural Science Foundation of China(62122059,81925020,61976152,and 81630051)the Young Elite Scientist Sponsorship Program by CAST(2018QNRC001).
文摘It has been almost 50 years since the term“brain–computer interface”(BCI)was first proposed by Jacques J.Vidal in 1973[1].Unlike traditional electronic interfaces that transmit nonliving information between devices,BCIs set up a communication bridge between a living brain and nonliving devices.Technically speaking,a BCI is a system that measures brain activity and converts it into the artificial outputs that replace,restore,enhance,supplement,or improve the natural central nervous system outputs[2].At present,electroencephalography(EEG)is the most commonly used brain signal for BCIs.
基金supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China(2017YFB1300302)the National Natural Science Foundation of China(81925020 and61976152)the Young Elite Scientist Sponsorship Program of the China Association for Science and Technology(2018QNRC001)。
文摘The brain function of prediction is fundamental for human beings to shape perceptions efficiently and successively. Through decades of effort, a valuable brain activation map has been obtained for prediction. However,much less is known about how the brain manages the prediction process over time using traditional neuropsychological paradigms. Here, we implemented an innovative paradigm for timing prediction to precisely study the temporal dynamics of neural oscillations. In the experiment recruiting 45 participants, expectation suppression was found for the overall electroencephalographic activity,consistent with previous hemodynamic studies. Notably,we found that N1 was positively associated with predictability while N2 showed a reversed relation to predictability. Furthermore, the matching prediction had a similar profile with no timing prediction, both showing an almost saturated N1 and an absence of N2. The results indicate that the N1 process showed a ‘sharpening' effect for predictable inputs, while the N2 process showed a‘dampening' effect. Therefore, these two paradoxical neural effects of prediction, which have provoked wide confusion in accounting for expectation suppression,actually co-exist in the procedure of timing prediction but work in separate time windows. These findings strongly support a recently-proposed opposing process theory.
