Home | Agenda | Meeting Information | Registration and Housing | Students | Abstracts | Workshops | CME Information | Satellite Meetings | Participants | Sponsors | Job Board | Special Issues | Contact Us
This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and Policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education through the joint sponsorship of Albany Medical College and Wadsworth Center. Albany Medical College is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
The Albany Medical College designates this Live activity for a maximum of 18 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
The morning (08:30 - 12:00) and afternoon (13:30 - 17:00) of 6th of June will be devoted to 3.5 hour workshops that will run concurrently. Up to 15 workshops will be held in each time slot. Each workshop will engage 10-40 participants and focus on a specific topic. Workshops can combine invited talks, targeted discussions, demonstrations, hands-on exercises and/or sharply focused debates as the leaders see fit. Workshop organization should include the participation of senior researchers to ensure proper coverage of the topic.
Thursday, June 6 - MORNING SESSIONS
M:1 Independent Home Use of BCI: Requirements for Translation and EvaluationAndrea Kübler, Theresa Vaughan, Eric Sellers and Elisa Holz
Over the past 20 years, research on BCIs that can provide communication and control to individuals with severe motor impairment has increased almost exponentially. While considerable effort has been dedicated to offline analysis for improving signal detection and translation, online studies with the target populations are far less common; there remains a great need for translational studies that examine BCI use by target populations. Further, long-term studies with users in the field are required to improve reliability of BCI control. This workshop seeks to expand the BCI community's understanding of what is required to translate BCI technology. We will discuss the needs and requirements for translational studies, i.e., BCIs must be simple to operate, need minimal expert oversight, be usable by people who are extremely disabled, and provide reliable, long-term performance in complex environments. Topics will include BCI reliability and utility; system robustness and convenience; training and technical support; subject inclusion criteria, recruitment, consent, and retention. Special attention will be given to the user-centered approach; bringing BCI to people in the locked-in state and strategies for the evaluation of BCI use. First results of studies of independent use by locked-in patients at their home will be presented as a basis for further roadmaps.
M:2 BCIs in Stroke Rehabilitation - NOT APPROVED FOR CMEChristoph Guger, Donatella Mattia, Junichi Ushiba, Cuntai Guan, Surjo R. Soekadar and Woosang Cho
Lately, BCI systems are becoming increasingly used in the context of stroke rehabilitation. The majority of those BCI systems are based on motor imagery activating the sensorimotor cortex. This activity is translated into continuous control signals for rehabilitation devices. While these devices can be Virtual Reality setups allowing the users to see moving limbs of avatars, studies in patient populations have also successfully used functional electrical stimulation, robotic devices, or exoskeletons attached to the patients paralyzed limbs. The workshop will review current stroke rehabilitation programs from different research labs and will give an insight into technology, experimental setups, results and outcomes of patient studies.
M:3 Passive BCI - Using Neurophysiological Signals that Reflect Cognitive or Affective State - Maximum capacity reached!Anne-Marie Brouwer, Thorsten Zander and Jan van Erp
To date, most BCIs are aimed at assisting patients for whom brain signals could form an alternative output channel as opposed to more common human output channels, like speech and moving the hands. However, brain signals (possibly in combination with other physiological signals) also form an output channel above and beyond the more usual ones: they can potentially provide continuous, online information about an individual's cognitive and affective state without the need of conscious or effortful communication. This information could be used in a number of ways. Examples include monitoring workload through EEG for adaptive automation and detecting amygdala responses for neuromarketing. We are preparing a special issue in Frontiers in Neuroscience in which we would like to publish studies of high scientific quality that are directed towards applications that utilize spontaneously, effortlessly generated neurophysiological signals (brain and/or other physiological signals) reflecting cognitive or affective state. We especially welcome studies that describe specific real world applications demonstrating a significant benefit compared to standard applications. We also look forward to original, new kinds of (proposed) applications in this area. This workshop is intended to bring people together who are interested and working in this field. We will together discuss the state of the art of the field, formulate the major challenges and compose a list of recommendations for future research. This will be used as input for a collaborative introductory paper in the special issue. We hope to meet many new faces. People who are presently working on other kinds of BCI but who are interested to think and work with us in this direction are very welcome!
M:4 Combining BMI and Neural Stimulation for Restoration of Sensory-motor FunctionRobert Leeb, Silvestro Micera, Kai Keng Ang, J.E. O'Doherty and Ricardo Chavarriaga
A brain-machine interface (BMI) typically relies on registering and decoding electric neuronal activity to control external devices. This workshop focuses on what may be seen as its counterpart: stimulation of electric neuronal activity - both at central and peripheral levels - for complementing the use of BMIs for restoring sensory or motor functions. On one hand, BMI could be used to control of peripheral neuronal stimulation, effectively substituting impaired neural pathways to restore motor functions in patients suffering from e.g. paralysis of upper limbs. Furthermore, it has been hypothesized that this coordinated stimulation at central and peripheral levels can help in neurorehabilitation. On the other hand, invasive cortical microstimulation can be utilized to provide somatosensory feedback substituting or enhancing sensory capabilities, in what has been termed a bi-directional BCI. However, these challenging goals do not exhaust the possibilities. Techniques like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modify neuronal excitability, potentially influencing the modulation of electrophysiological patterns exploited by BMI. Current research addresses the question of whether such stimulation does facilitate BMI control or improve its performance. In addition, they also assess if these techniques can selectively enhance the activity of physiologically targeted brain areas, an interesting property for BMI-assisted neurorehabilitation. The workshop will overview the current state of the art, discuss the benefits, disadvantages and difficulties of the different methods to prepare the ground for a successful combination of BMI and stimulation techniques - both as a facilitator of BMI control and as a mean to effectively close the BMI loop.
M:5 BCI Software Platforms and StandardsClemens Brunner, Gerwin Schalk, Jürgen Mellinger, Christian Kothe, and Febo Cincotti,
In this workshop, we will discuss BCI software platforms and talk about interoperability and standardization issues. We will also touch upon the topic of a common file format for BCI data exchange. In this session, we will have representatives of several major BCI software platforms in one room. After short introductions of each platform, we will discuss how different platforms can be combined with each other. For example, a BCI researcher cherry-picking the best features of each platform might want to use the data acquisition module from platform A, feed the data into platform B to perform signal processing and classification tasks, whereas platform C visualizes the classifier output and provides feedback to the BCI user. Finally, the researcher might want to share the recorded data with coworkers from other labs, and thus choose a file format which is supported by all major platforms. In summary, we will review the current state of the art and discuss required steps to improve interoperability between platforms. We will also review several file formats to lay the foundations for a common file format in the BCI research field.
M:6 BCIs for Neurodevelopmental Disorders - NOT APPROVED FOR CMEDisha Gupta, Scott Makeig, Jaime A. Pineda, Jeanne Townsend, Tzyy-Ping Jung, Leanne Chukoskie, Jonathan Tarbox, and Armin Schnürer
Neurodevelopmental disorders such as Autism-spectrum disorders (ASD) are now estimated to affect 1 in 88 children (CDC 2012). ASD encompasses a complex range of neurodevelopmental disorders, characterized by social impairments, communication difficulties, and restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped behavior patterns. ASD varies in severity and character, encompassing individuals who are asocial but otherwise high-functioning (even sometimes at "savant" level), and low-functioning nonspeaking individuals. The only known effective treatment paths are intensive one-to-one applied behavior therapies. These demand 40+ hours per week for 2-3 years, the high cost of which is not currently reimbursed in the US and is entirely out of reach to the majority of those in developing countries. Moreover, neuroscientific research towards interventions is predominantly performed with high-functioning adults or adolescents. This is understandable because subjects from the lower extreme of the spectrum are most likely younger, non-compliant and difficult to manage. Consequently, many of the practical barriers experienced by translational researchers in other BCI fields stand in the way of even basic research in such challenging populations. However, it is the younger lower-functioning groups that have the greatest need for diagnosis and treatment, who have the greatest barrier to communication (and hence the greatest need for replacement or enhancement of communication via BCI), and who may experience the greatest benefit if BCI can improve function or prevent progression of the disorder at an early stage. In this workshop, we will introduce and discuss the potential scope and incentives for diversifying BCI R&D into interventions and tools for such populations. The challenges are many but the incentives are great. There is also a need to disseminate and share the ongoing efforts towards such prospects, the practical and research challenges, and requirements that are still unaddressed. Progress will require active collaborations and networking between behavioral researchers, electrophysiology (animal and human) researchers, clinicians, caregivers and equipment manufacturers.
M:7 Non-Invasive BCI-Control of Grasp Neuroprosthesis in High Spinal Cord Injured HumansGernot Müller-Putz and Rüdiger Rupp
The bilateral loss of the grasp function associated with a complete or nearly complete lesion of the cervical spinal cord severely limits the affected individuals' ability to live independently and retain gainful employment post injury. Thus, it represents a tremendous reduction in the patients' quality of life. Any improvement of a lost or limited function is highly desirable not only from the patients' point of view but also for economic reasons. If tendon transfers are not applicable due to the missing availability of muscles under voluntary control neuroprostheses based on Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES) provide a non-invasive option for functional improvement of the upper extremity function. In particular, hybrid-FES systems consisting of FES and active orthotic components seem to be effective in restoration of a relevant grasp function. On the other hand, EEG-based Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI's) may be a valuable component in a neuroprosthetic user interface. A major advantage over other assistive devices (ADs) is that it can be operated independently from residual motor functions. Beyond this, Motor-Imagery(MI)-based BCIs have enormous implications providing natural control of a grasping and reaching neuroprosthesis in particular in individuals with a high spinal cord injury (SCI) by relying on volitional signals recorded from the brain directly involved in upper extremity movements. The combination of traditional ADs with a BCI (hybrid-BCI) opens new possibilities for real-time autonomous control of a neuroprosthesis by the end user with an SCI. This workshop will present the current state of the art in non-invasive grasp neuroprosthesis and hybrid-BCIs and will include a combination of invited talks together with targeted discussions and sharply focused debates. As a highlight it will include a demonstration of a noninvasive BCI-controlled neuroprosthesis in an individual with SCI.
M:8 Neuronal Ensembles for BCI: Local Field Potentials and ElectrocorticographyAysegul Gunduz, Nick Ramsey, Eric Leuthardt, Bradley Voytek, Kai Miller, Gerwin Schalk and Wei Wang
Recordings from neuronal ensembles, namely local field potentials (LFPs) and electrocorticography (ECoG), have attracted increasing interest in the field of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) due to the stability and specificity of these recordings for the interpretation of behavioral and cognitive tasks. This workshop will review the current understanding of the physiological principals and signal properties of LFPs and ECoG, and present the emerging trends in their utilization in BCIs. Moreover, our goal is to bring together neuroscientists, psychologists, clinicians and engineers for exuberant and impactful discussions on how to move LFP/ECoG-based BCIs into clinical implementation, giving consideration to long-term effects and ethical issues.
M:9 BCI Performance MetricsDavid Thompson, Shangkai Gao, Lucia Quitadamo (Luigi Bianchi) and Luca Mainardi (Matteo Matteucci)
Currently, many different metrics are used for BCI performance measurement, and most of them cannot be calculated from the others. This workshop will include a presentation on the merits of several performance metrics, and allow ample time for focused debate on standardization of metric choice and rules for use of these metrics. The goal of the workshop is to produce guidelines for measuring performance in a fair and comparable way, to help improve the state of BCI research going forward.
M:10 Is Plasticity Necessary for Good BCI Control?Aaron Bautista, Dan Moran, Justin Sanchez, Patrick Sadtler, Karunesh Ganguly, Jose Carmena, Amy Orsborn, Steve Chase and Andy Jackson
It is remarkable that users can control a neural prosthesis with fewer than 100 neurons. Good algorithm design, and also neural plasticity, both contribute. As with any tool, no matter how well-designed it is for its user and the task, the user still must learn to control a BCI. Should we intentionally design BCIs with a "learning curve", or should we design them to be as "user friendly" as possible? It can be argued that learning is continuous, and inevitable, so we should not try too hard to optimize a decoder for any given brain state, since that's a moving target. Alternatively, if we understood what the neurons in our population "really" controlled during reaching with the arm, we could presumably design a decoder that was tailored to the natural function of the neurons being recorded. Such a decoder would operate seamlessly from the moment it was turned on. Each approach raises scientific challenges - if we rely on plasticity, what are the rules by which the brain learns to control a new effector? If we design the best possible decoder we can, what principles of motor control should it embody?! This session will advance two goals: first, enumerating some design principles or constraints for the creation of effective BCIs; and second, using BCIs as a tool to study how the brain controls normal movement.
A:1 BCI and Detection of Consciousness - NOT APPROVED FOR CMEChristoph Guger, Andrea Kübler, Damien Lesenfants, Donatella Mattia, Gernot Müller-Putz and Srivas Chennu
When assessed by expert teams, 43% of patients diagnosed as vegetative are reclassified as (at least) minimally conscious (Cruse et al., 2011). A further subset of potentially communicative non-responsive patients might be undetectable through standard clinical testing. Other patients might have transient periods of relative wakefulness, but remain unaware of their surroundings. This workshop will give an overview of groups that aim to use BCI technology to identify non-responsive patients that might be able to communicate. One recent review showed that 4 of 24 patients (17%) identified as being in a vegetative state (VS) were not only consciously aware, but could answer yes or no questions in fMRI (Monti, 2012). Hence, some users meet all behavioral criteria for VS, but nevertheless have covert awareness. Another recent study found that 3 of 16 patients (19%), who were classified as VS and totally unresponsive behaviorally, could consistently produce specific EEG patterns to two different commands (Cruse et al., 2011). In the workshop we will show and discuss recent experiments, analysis methods and results with EEG, fNIRS and fMRI. The goal of the workshop is to identify the most important trends of the last years and to facilitate interaction between participants.
A:2 Current State and Future Challenges in Auditory BCIMichael Tangermann, Jeremy Hill and Martijn Schreuder
The ability to decode and assess perceptual and attentional processing of the auditory system in real time is an emerging capability in our field. Even on the scale of BCI research, BCIs driven by auditory stimuli are a relatively new phenomenon. With some key publications over the last 5 years, the auditory BCI approach has gained and continues to gain momentum. It is underpinned by the BCI community's efforts to find alternatives to the traditional BCI paradigms to meet the needs of end users who require a non-visual communication system. Beyond its use in communication, auditory BCI also has potential impact in areas such as attention monitoring and neurofeedback training to improve performance, and diagnosis and treatment of disorders that have an auditory component. During this workshop we will assess the current and potential applications for, and current state of the research in, auditory BCI. This will result in a review paper/road-map to which participants are invited to contribute. We will establish a common vision for the future of auditory BCI during group discussions. This is expected to lead to new, possibly unimagined, research paths to pursue and it will generate ideas for research groups interested in becoming active in this field. The workshop will have a strong social aspect. This is in part to tap into the collective knowledge of the participants and in part to initiate a stronger feeling of community amongst research groups in auditory BCI. During the workshop we will discuss an infrastructure that allows the continued exchange of tools, ideas, questions and technology after the workshop.
CANCELLED A:3 Context Awareness for BCIsTom Carlson, Jose Carmena, Todd Coleman and José d.R. Millan
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI's) are no longer used only to control simple cursor movements on the screen, but are increasingly employed to control real applications (writing programs, teleoperated robots, wheelchairs etc...), in the real world. This allows severely motor-disabled people to interact with their environments. Unfortunately, these applications typically require a very reliable and precise control channel to achieve performances comparable to healthy people using conventional interfaces. However, current day BCIs offer low throughput information and are insufficient for the full dexterous and sustained control of these complex applications. Techniques like context awareness and shared control can enhance the interaction to reach a similar level to traditional input devices, compensating for the fact that a BCI is not a perfect control channel. This workshop gives a glimpse into the most exciting research recently undertaken in this area. Severely motor-disabled people controlling robotic devices with the similar levels of performance as healthy participants; different shared control architectures that integrate the information from the BCI and environment sensors, in order to make an appropriate decisions; smart Human-Computer Interaction design which allows a system with limited commands (e.g. 2 or 3-class BCI) to fully control complex programs; and BCIs that use contextual information to improve the accuracy of the decoder. Furthermore, we want to discuss, recent ideas and possible new trends and how context awareness can help to improve the dependability of BCIs and push them out to the market.
A:4 Cognitive Processes and Brain-Machine Interfaces - Maximum capacity reached!Ricardo Chavarriaga, Justin Sanchez, Nathan Evans and Aleksander Sobolewski
A substantial part of research on brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) focuses on using cerebral electrophysiological correlates of motor activity to operate devices. However, brain correlates of cognitive processes can also be exploited in order to enhance human-machine interaction. For instance, invasive and non-invasive BMIs have explored correlates of error awareness to correct misclassification or as a teaching signal to improve performance; complementary research on invasively recorded reward-related activity has also been undertaken. Other approaches attempt to decode neural activity related to attentional and anticipatory processes, as well as sensory processing and mental workload. Conversely, BMIs can also provide valuable information to better understand the neurophysiology of such cognitive processes. In particular they allow study of these processes in interactive environments, as opposed to the traditionally used experimental paradigms. Recent work has shown how BMI paradigms can be used to study subjective senses of limb ownership and agency - a seemingly crucial aspect for efficient motor neuroprosthetics. This workshop will present some of the most exciting research done recently in this regard, paving the way for discussing the major challenges in the field.
A:5 Conducting BCI Experiments in the HomeChuck Anderson, Patti Davies, William Gavin and Marla Roll
Much of the published BCI research is still conducted in labs. It is problematic for labs without personnel experienced in conducting home-based research to expand their research out of the lab into the homes of subjects. This becomes more difficult when working with clients with severe motor impairments. This workshop will allow researchers who have experience with in-home experiments to share their experience with methods that work well and those that don't. Researchers without this experience will gain a better understanding of the steps to take to bring their research out of the lab and into homes so that this important work can be translated into applied research.
A:6 Tactile and Bone-Conduction Based BCI Paradigms - State of the Art, Challenges and Potential New Applications - NOT APPROVED FOR CMETomasz Rutkowski, Christoph Kapeller, Gen Hori, Mounia Ziat, Moonjeoung Chang and Hiromu Moru
State-of-the-art stimuli-driven BCI paradigms rely mostly on visual or auditory modalities. Recently tactile (or haptic) modality approaches have been proposed to offer alternative ways to deliver sensory stimulation inputs which could be crucial for patients suffering from weak or lost eye-sight or hearing. Already several preliminary techniques have been developed to connect the BCI to a traditional haptic interface or to utilize those interfaces as stimulation sources. The invited contributors to the workshop will present their recent developments and discuss pros and cons of their approaches. The workshop will balance oral interactive presentations with the recent demos to discuss and possibly to create new concepts in tactile BCI approaches. Vibrotactile stimulation brings also a possibility to create bone-conduction sensory effect in case of the head area exciters application. This concept, created by the workshop leader and collaborators, is still very preliminary yet already has existing applications. It brings a very interesting possibility to deliver multimodal stimuli (somatosensory and auditory combined) to TLS/ALS subjects with a very fast information transfer rate. We will also present classical haptic HCI examples to discuss possible applications for future BCI prototypes. We expect to brainstorm and create new directions in tactile- or haptic-BCI research. A possible summary or review paper will be submitted.
A:7 Augmentative and Alternative Communication for BCI 101Melanie Fried-Oken, Greg Bieker, Sarah Blackstone, Jane Huggins, Aimee Mooney, Betts Peters and Debra Zeitlin
The general goals of this workshop are to introduce the principles of Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) to the BCI community, and to introduce AAC device features through hands-on demonstrations. While many of us refer to AAC and boast that the BCI spellers are AAC devices, it is clear that the clinical framework and equipment that define this assistive technology and communication field are not clearly understood. The specific objectives, then, for this workshop include: (1) to introduce the evidence-based clinical field of Augmentative and Alternative Communication to the BCI research community through interactive lecture; (2) to describe and demonstrate the principles of message generation, assessment and intervention for people who rely on AAC, and relate them to clinical BCI research and use; (3) to provide hands-on opportunities for participants to use commercially available AAC devices and integrate their experiences with the clinical principles of BCI research and use.
A:8 Teaching the BCI Skill: Feedback and Human Training ApproachesFabien Lotte, Reinhold Scherer and Anatole Lécuyer
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) have been shown to be very promising for numerous applications, such as rehabilitation or entertainment, among many others. Despite this potential, most BCI applications remain prototypes that are not used in practice, outside laboratories. The main reason is the widely acknowledged low reliability of current BCI systems that are based on the translation of the spontaneous non-invasive electroencephalogram (EEG): Mental tasks performed by the user are being too often incorrectly recognized by the BCI. Poor recognition performances are due in part to "imperfect" signal processing algorithms used to analyze EEG signals. However, another component in the BCI loop may also be deficient: the signal generator, i.e., the user him/herself who may not be able to reliably produce EEG patterns. Indeed, it is widely acknowledged that BCI use is a skill, which means the user must be properly trained to achieve successful BCI control. If the user cannot correctly perform the desired mental commands, even the most advanced signal processing algorithm could not properly identify them. Despite this, the BCI community has devoted significant research efforts on signal processing, mostly neglecting the human in the loop. For instance, user feedback has been scarcely studied despite various studies which showed promising results with virtual reality and/or multi-sensory stimulations. This workshop aims at addressing this lack of research on training users, by focusing on feedback and training protocols for BCI. More particularly, this workshop aims at 1) convincing the audience that further research on BCI user training is valuable and necessary to push BCI performances to a new level, 2) reviewing current (good) BCI feedback and user training and 3) coming up with new ideas and research directions to advance protocols to teach the BCI skill. Overall, we expect this workshop to be a first step towards exciting new research works and results on user training approaches, with the potential to increase BCI performances and reduce BCI illiteracy.
CANCELLED A:9 Brain-Computer Music Interfaces Workshop ProposalRafael Ramirez, Zacharias Vamvakousis,Sergio Giraldo and Sabastián Mealla
Electroencephalogram systems provide useful information about the brain activity of humans and are becoming increasingly available outside the medical domain. Similarly to the information provided by other physiological sensors, Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) information can be used as a source for interpreting a person's emotions and intentions. This workshop focuses on Brain-computer Music Interfaces (BCMI), i.e. on the application of BCIs as intelligent sensors, which can be used in the study of the inter-relationship between music and brain activity. The main questions the workshop aims to discuss and investigate include:
- How could BCIs, as intelligent sensors, be best integrated in musical systems (may be alongside other modes of input control)?
- What constitutes appropriate musical adaptation in response to brain activity (and other physiological) data?
- How is the user experience of music systems enhanced through BCIs as intelligent sensors?
A:10 Causing a Sensation: Development of a Somatosensory Afferent Interface for BCI Users - Maximum capacity reached!Lee Miller, Kevin Otto, Dustin Tyler, Doug Weber, Sliman Bensmaia and Philip Sabes
Virtually all BCIs rely exclusively on visual feedback, a poor substitute for natural somatosensation. Patients who are not paralyzed, but have nonetheless lost somatosensation, make movements that are slow, poorly coordinated, and require great concentration. For BCI applications intended to restore movement to be fully successful, it is very likely that patients with spinal cord injury or limb amputation will require a somatosensory interface to convey tactile and proprioceptive feedback in addition to an efferent interface to provide movement. To this end, microstimulation methods are being developed using electrodes implanted at various locations along the somatosensory neuroaxis. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss the need for and the design of a somatosensory interface. These considerations are likely to be quite different for SCI and amputation, and panel members will discuss a variety of approaches, including stimulation of peripheral nerves, the dorsal root ganglia, and primary somatosensory cortex. We will consider optimal methods for delivering electrical stimulation, different methods by which tactile and proprioceptive information may be encoded in stimulus trains, and the importance of plasticity and adaptation in the process of learning to use a somatosensory neural interface. Each speaker will have 25 minutes to describe their work, addressing these and other themes that are central to the workshop, and to answer specific questions from the audience. The workshop with end with 45 minutes of moderated discussion among panel members and audience addressing the central themes that have developed during the presentations.
A:11 BCI Certifications, Guidelines and Other StandardsBrendan Allison, Shangkai Gao, Anton Nijholt, Laura Cabrera and Armin Schnuerer
This workshop will work toward standardized guidelines within BCI research. Since this proposal complements the "BCI Software Platforms" proposal, the topics covered in that workshop will not be discussed here. Instead, we will discuss information transfer rate reporting, certification procedures and how to adopt them for BCI practitioners (if necessary), media reporting guidelines and mechanisms to implement the recommendations from this workshop. The workshop includes some open discussion time to discuss new topics that the audience may raise, and a general discussion at the end.