I have argued in parts I, II, III of this essay that the brain signal is a direct reflection of the mind. I have also claimed a better definition of the latter would yield more useful brain signal “targets” for designer, tester, trainer and user of a BCI device. I now wish to explain further how these mind/brain targets might help the user. First, it has been argued the user — their intentions, mental states and skills — is a central aspect of BCI classifier development, training, and…

In Parts I and II of this essay I argue the user’s mind is an underutilized, yet potentially very useful, resource for improving BCI performance. In particular, I argue (a) the mind corresponds to, if not controls, the brain signal, (b) is most accurately defined as a set of general memories, based on experience (not brain “processing”), and (c) general memories are optimal brain signal “targets” for designer, teacher, learner, and user to shoot for. In other words brain signal targets — when defined accurately (as a set…

In part I of this essay I argued that brain signal “targets’ can be defined, based on the BCI user’s state of mind. More precisely: (a) the user’s mind can be defined with accuracy, for a given task (b) these mental states are reflected by a corresponding brain signal, (c) mind/brain signal “signatures” (that are desired, unique, and easy-to-achieve) can be seen as “targets” for the BCI user to try to “hit,” and (d) mind/brain signal targets are a viable path forward for BCI designer, trainer, user and…