Sign in
NeurosciencebioRxiv
Preprint

Data aggregation strategies for a P300 speller: decoding models, epoch averaging, cross-subject ensembles, and multi-channel models

L. S. SidoroviD, Anna V MakarovaiD, Archil Iverievich MaysuradzeiD, Mikhail A. LebedeviD

Abstract

Accurate detection of P300 event-related potentials from electroencephalography (EEG) re-mains challenging for small numbers of trials due to low signal-to-noise ratios and substantial inter-subject variability. This study presents a systematic comparison of data aggregation strate-gies for improving P300 classification, evaluated on a 10-subject dataset using two convolutional neural network architectures (EEGNet and BaseCNN) and a support vector machine (SVM). We compared: (1) subject-specific and pooled general models for single trials; (2) epoch aver-aging with 5 and 10 stimuli repetitions; (3) multi-channel models where subjects corresponded to different input channels; (4) cross-subject averaging; (5) mixed (uncontrolled) averaging; (6) a combined approach with K trials per subject across all participants; and (7) time-shifted channels from extended single-trial epochs. Decoding performance was quantified using the Information Transfer Rate (ITR), computed for binary classification accuracy. We found that single-trial ITR was unpractical (0.15-0.64 bits/trial), whereas controlled aggregation improved the performance. The combined cross-subject approach with K = 3 trials per participant (30 channels) achieves the highest ITR with multi-channel EEGNet: 0.95 bits/aggregated decision in the no-aperture recordings and 0.97 bits/aggregated decision on Aperture data, approaching the theoretical binary-classification limit for the aggregated decision. Controlled cross-subject averaging consistently outperformed random trial mixing, and multi-channel architectures out-performed simple averaging when inter-subject structure was preserved. These findings con-tribute to improving P300 decoding and implementing multi-subject brain-computer interfaces (BCIs).

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISL. '26Williams '23Ehinger '23Solon '19Csáky '23Tuckute '19
68% semantic matchNeuroscience
Pouya Taghipour L., Amirsadra Khodadadi, Faranak Rezaei+3 more·bioRxiv·Oct 20, 2026