BCI Competition IV 2b results about m-shallowconvnet HOT 4 CLOSED

Great, I see. Thank you very much!

from m-shallowconvnet.

Hi @sansiro77,

Yes, I evaluated the performance of BCI competition 4 2b using two evaluation files which were the original test data training with three training files.

However, I didn't evaluate the subject independent tasks. Also, I didn't research the SOTA results in subject independent tasks.

from m-shallowconvnet.

I also wonder why you choose tmin, tmax = 0., 3..
I get the dataset from MOABB, so the data format may be a little different.
However, according to the original description file, the imagery period is from 4s to 7s without feedback or from 3.5s to 7.5s with feedback.
Did I miss something?

from m-shallowconvnet.

@sansiro77

The format of MOABB and original data is different.

In my case, tmin, tmax = 0., 3. indicates the 3 to 6 sec..
The reason why I chose an interval like this is that many previous studies commonly used the data containing cue time.
I think the features of the motor imagery were also contained before the imagery period like MRCP.
For this reason, I contained the cue time data.

The reason why set the tmax as 3 is that I optimized the interval, which showed the best performance.

However, in my custom data, I verified that this model also worked well when conducted only in the imagery period.

from m-shallowconvnet.