Motor imagery (MI) is a technique of imagining the performance of a motor task without actually using the muscles. When employed in a brain–computer interface (BCI) supported by electroencephalographic (EEG) sensors, it can be used as a successful method of human–computer interaction. In this paper, the performance of six different classifiers, namely linear discriminant analysis (LDA), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and three classifiers from the family of convolutional neural networks (CNN), is evaluated using EEG MI datasets. The study investigates the effectiveness of these classifiers on MI, guided by a static visual cue, dynamic visual guidance, and a combination of dynamic visual and vibrotactile (somatosensory) guidance. The effect of filtering passband during data preprocessing was also investigated. The results show that the ResNet-based CNN significantly outperforms the competing classifiers on both vibrotactile and visually guided data when detecting different directions of MI. Preprocessing the data using low-frequency signal features proves to be a better solution to achieve higher classification accuracy. It has also been shown that vibrotactile guidance has a significant impact on classification accuracy, with the associated improvement particularly evident for architecturally simpler classifiers. These findings have important implications for the development of EEG-based BCIs, as they provide valuable insight into the suitability of different classifiers for different contexts of use.

Background: Motor imagery is a cognitive process of imagining a performance of a motor task without employing the actual movement of muscles. It is often used in rehabilitation and utilized in assistive technologies to control a brain–computer interface (BCI). This paper provides a comparison of different time–frequency representations (TFR) and their Rényi and Shannon entropies for sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) based motor imagery control signals in electroencephalographic (EEG) data. The motor imagery task was guided by visual guidance, visual and vibrotactile (somatosensory) guidance or visual cue only. Results: When using TFR-based entropy features as an input for classification of different interaction intentions, higher accuracies were achieved (up to 99.87%) in comparison to regular time-series amplitude features (for which accuracy was up to 85.91%), which is an increase when compared to existing methods. In particular, the highest accuracy was achieved for the classification of the motor imagery versus the baseline (rest state) when using Shannon entropy with Reassigned Pseudo Wigner–Ville time–frequency representation. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the quantity of useful classifiable motor imagery information (entropy output) changes during the period of motor imagery in comparison to baseline period; as a result, there is an increase in the accuracy and F1 score of classification when using entropy features in comparison to the accuracy and the F1 of classification when using amplitude features, hence, it is manifested as an improvement of the ability to detect motor imagery.

This paper deals with biometric identification based on unique patterns and characteristics of an individual’s handwriting, focusing on the dynamic writing process on a touchscreen device. Related work in this domain indicates the dominance of specific research approaches. Namely, in most cases, only the signature is analyzed, verification methods are more prevalent than recognition methods, and the provided solutions are mainly based on using a particular device or specific sensor for collecting biometric data. In this context, our work aims to fill the identified research gap by introducing a new handwriting-based user recognition technique. The proposed approach implements the concept of sensor fusion and does not rely exclusively on signatures for recognition but also includes other forms of handwriting, such as short sentences, words, or individual letters. Additionally, two different ways of handwriting input, using a stylus and a finger, are introduced into the analysis. In order to collect data on the dynamics of handwriting and signing, a specially designed apparatus was used with various sensors integrated into common smart devices, along with additional external sensors and accessories. A total of 60 participants took part in a controlled experiment to form a handwriting biometrics dataset for further analysis. To classify participants’ handwriting, custom architecture CNN models were utilized for feature extraction and classification tasks. The obtained results showed that the proposed handwriting recognition system achieves accuracies of 0.982, 0.927, 0.884, and 0.661 for signatures, words, short sentences, and individual letters, respectively. We further investigated the main effects of the input modality and the train set’s size on the system’s accuracy. Finally, an ablation study was carried out to analyze the impact of individual sensors within the fusion-based setup.