scholarly journals Recognition of Eye-Written Characters with Limited Number of Training Data Based on a Siamese Network

Electronics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 3009
Author(s):  
Dong-Hyun Kang ◽  
Won-Du Chang
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Test Data ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
High Accuracy ◽  
Training Data ◽  
Computer Interface ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Siamese Network ◽  
Ensemble Algorithm

Developing a hum–computer interface (HCI) is essential, especially for those that have spinal cord injuries or paralysis, because of the difficulties associated with the application of conventional devices and systems. Eye-writing is an HCI that uses eye movements for writing characters such that the gaze movements form letters. In addition, it is a promising HCI because it can be utilized even when voices and hands are inaccessible. However, eye-writing HCI has low accuracy and encounters difficulties in obtaining data. This study proposes a method for recognizing eye-written characters accurately and with limited data. The proposed method is constructed using a Siamese network, an attention mechanism, and an ensemble algorithm. In the experiment, the proposed method successfully classified the eye-written characters (Arabic numbers) with high accuracy (92.78%) when the ratio of training to test data was 2:1. In addition, the method was tested as the ratio changed, and 80.80% accuracy was achieved when the number of training data was solely one-tenth of the test data.

scholarly journals BRAIN COMPUTER INTERFACE (BCI) ON ATTENTION: A SCOPING REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (Spl-1- GCSGD_2020) ◽  
pp. S10-S22
Author(s):  
Anita Prem ◽  
◽  
K Mohanraj ◽  
A Rajan Samuel ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Brain Computer Interface ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Computer Interface ◽  
Neurofeedback Training ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Technological Intervention

Technological innovations are now an integral part of healthcare. Brain-computer interface (BCI) is a novel technological intervention system that is useful in restoring function to people disabled by neurological disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), cerebral palsy, stroke, or spinal cord injury. This paper surveys the literature concerning the effectiveness of BCI on attention in subjects under various conditions. The findings of this scoping review are that studies have been made on ADHD, ALS, ASD subjects, and subjects recovering from brain and spinal cord injuries. BCI based neurofeedback training is seen to be effective in improving attention in these subjects. Some studies have also been made on healthy subjects.BCI based neurofeedback training promises neurocognitive improvement and EEG changes in the elderly. Different cognitive assessments have been tried on healthy adults. From this review, it is evident that hardly any research has been done on using BCI for enhancing attention in post-stroke subjects. So there arises the necessity for making a study on the effects of BCI based attention training in post-stroke subjects, as attention is the key for learning motor skills that get impaired following a stroke. Currently, many researches are underway to determine the effects of a BCI based training program for the enhancement of attention in post-stroke subjects.

Impairment Rating and Spinal Cord Injuries: Revisiting the Guides

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Richard T. Katz
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Functional Independence ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Multiple Organ ◽  
Loss Of Function ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Organ Systems ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Impairment Ratings

Abstract This article addresses some criticisms of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) by comparing previously published outcome data from a group of complete spinal cord injury (SCI) persons with impairment ratings for a corresponding level of injury calculated using the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition. Results of the comparison show that impairment ratings using the sixth edition scale poorly with the level of impairments of activities of daily living (ADL) in SCI patients as assessed by the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor scale and the extended FIM motor scale. Because of the combinations of multiple impairments, the AMA Guides potentially overrates the impairment of paraplegics compared with that of quadriplegics. The use and applicability of the Combined Values formula should be further investigated, and complete loss of function of two upper extremities seems consistent with levels of quadriplegia using the SCI model. Some aspects of the AMA Guides contain inconsistencies. The concept of diminishing impairment values is not easily translated between specific losses of function per organ system and “overall” loss of ADLs involving multiple organ systems, and the notion of “catastrophic thresholds” involving multiple organ systems may support the understanding that variations in rating may exist in higher rating cases such as those that involve an SCI.

Spinal Impairment Evaluation: Fifth Edition Changes

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert H. Haralson
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Standard Terminology ◽  
Made In

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, was published in November 2000 and contains major changes from its predecessor. In the Fourth Edition, all musculoskeletal evaluation and rating was described in a single chapter. In the Fifth Edition, this information has been divided into three separate chapters: Upper Extremity (13), Lower Extremity (14), and Spine (15). This article discusses changes in the spine chapter. The Models for rating spinal impairment now are called Methods. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, has reverted to standard terminology for spinal regions in the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) Method, and both it and the Range of Motion (ROM) Method now reference cervical, thoracic, and lumbar. Also, the language requiring the use of the DRE, rather than the ROM Method has been strengthened. The biggest change in the DRE Method is that evaluation should include the treatment results. Unfortunately, the Fourth Edition's philosophy regarding when and how to rate impairment using the DRE Model led to a number of problems, including the same rating of all patients with radiculopathy despite some true differences in outcomes. The term differentiator was abandoned and replaced with clinical findings. Significant changes were made in evaluation of patients with spinal cord injuries, and evaluators should become familiar with these and other changes in the Fifth Edition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document