Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 3, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
A central challenge in assistive brain-to-robot control is decoding a user's latent intent from complex and noisy brain signals. Prior approaches evaluate decoders as single-trial classifiers with accuracy-based metrics, but this neglects the inherently sequential nature of assistive control. Since a planner must integrate intermittent, noisy decoder outputs over time, single-step accuracy can only be a proxy when predicting downstream task performance. We formalize brain-to-robot control as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP), and prove that there is a sharp phase transition: regret is uniformly bounded across the horizon as long as pairs of goals are all decoder-distinguishable, but grows linearly otherwise. We show that a single channel statistic, the worst-pair Chernoff information $Γ_{\min}$ sets this boundary. Then, we derive a closed-form regret predictor $U_{\mathrm{id}}(C)$, that can be computed from any confusion matrix in $O(K^2)$ time. Across two domains spanning orthogonal information channels, we show that $U_{\mathrm{id}}$ predicts cumulative planning regret beyond what accuracy can explain. We then highlight a pathological accuracy trap, in which two decoders have identical validation accuracy 35.1% on real EEG data (BNCI2014001 subject 5) but result in a difference of $9.6\times$ in held-out regret, which $U_{\mathrm{id}}$ predicts. Same-signal control confirms $U_{\mathrm{id}}$'s advantage with decoders that span independent feature channels. Ultimately, our work provides a drop-in diagnostic to evaluate and select sensors and decoders in sequential assistive control.