NeuroMesh: A Brain-Computer Interface Framework for Real-Time Motor Imagery Classification Using Edge-Optimized Deep Learning and Haptic Feedback Integration

Yash Manoj KamatwarShri Sai College of Engineering and Technology, DBATU University, Bhadravati, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, IndiaGajendra Pradip KhandaleShri Sai College of Engineering and Technology, DBATU University, Bhadravati, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, IndiaGunvant Pradip KhandaleShri Sai College of Engineering and Technology, DBATU University, Bhadravati, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, IndiaSumit Arun PoteShri Sai College of Engineering and Technology, DBATU University, Bhadravati, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, IndiaPushpa T. TandekarAssistant Professor, Shri Sai College of Engineering and Technology, DBATU University, Bhadravati, Chandrapur, Maharashtra, India

Vol 10 No 5 (2026): Volume 10, Issue 5, May 2026 | Pages: 170-178

International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology

OPEN ACCESS | Research Article | Published Date: 09-05-2026

doi Logo doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2026.105022

Abstract

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) represent one of the most transformative frontiers in human-computer interaction, yet widespread adoption remains constrained by computational latency, bulky hardware, and limited accessibility in resource-constrained environments. This paper presents NeuroMesh, a novel edge-computing Brain-Computer Interface framework designed and implemented as a B.Tech final-year project at Shri Sai College of Engineering and Technology (SSCET), Bhadravati. NeuroMesh enables real-time motor imagery classification from non-invasive electroencephalography (EEG) signals using an edge-optimized hybrid deep learning architecture combining lightweight Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) with Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs), deployed on the Raspberry Pi 4 and NVIDIA Jetson Nano platforms. The framework achieves end-to-end classification latency of 127 ms with 91.3% accuracy on the BCI Competition IV Dataset 2b, outperforming traditional cloud-dependent approaches that incur 800+ ms round-trip delays. A custom-designed haptic feedback subsystem translates classified motor imagery intentions into vibrotactile patterns delivered through wearable actuator arrays, enabling bidirectional human-machine communication without visual dependency. The system incorporates an adaptive calibration module using few-shot learning to personalize models to individual users within 5 minutes of initial setup, addressing inter-subject variability --- the principal challenge in EEG-based BCIs. All signal processing, feature extraction, inference, and feedback control execute locally on the edge device, ensuring complete data privacy and operability in offline environments. Rigorous evaluation across 12 participants demonstrates a System Usability Scale (SUS) score of 82.7, P300 spell-corrected communication throughput of 12.4 bits/min, and successful integration with assistive robotic actuators for upper-limb rehabilitation exercises.

Keywords

Brain-Computer Interface (BCI); Motor Imagery Classification; Edge Computing; Electroencephalography (EEG); Deep Learning; Convolutional Neural Network; Gated Recurrent Unit; Haptic Feedback; Few-Shot Learning; Assistive Technology; Raspberry Pi; NVIDIA Jetson Nano; Real-Time Signal Processing


Citation of this Article

Yash Manoj Kamatwar, Gajendra Pradip Khandale, Gunvant Pradip Khandale, Sumit Arun Pote, & Pushpa T. Tandekar. (2026). NeuroMesh: A Brain-Computer Interface Framework for Real-Time Motor Imagery Classification Using Edge-Optimized Deep Learning and Haptic Feedback Integration. International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology - IRJIET, 10(5), 170-178. Article DOI https://doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2026.105022

References
  1. J. J. Vidal, "Toward direct brain-computer communication," Annual Review of Biophysics and Bioengineering, vol. 2, pp. 157-180, 1973.
  2. G. Pfurtscheller and C. Neuper, "Motor imagery and direct brain-computer communication," Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 89, no. 7, pp. 1123-1134, 2001. doi: 10.1109/5.939829
  3. H. Ramoser, J. Muller-Gerking, and G. Pfurtscheller, "Optimal spatial filtering of single trial EEG during imagined hand movement," IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 441-446, 2000.
  4. R. T. Schirrmeister et al., "Deep learning with convolutional neural networks for EEG decoding and visualization," Human Brain Mapping, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 5391-5420, 2017.
  5. V. J. Lawhern et al., "EEGNet: A compact convolutional neural network for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces," Journal of Neural Engineering, vol. 15, no. 5, Art. 056013, 2018.
  6. A.G. Howard et al., "MobileNets: Efficient convolutional neural networks for mobile vision applications," arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.04861, 2017.
  7. M. Tan and Q. Le, "EfficientNet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks," in Proc. ICML, 2019, pp. 6105-6114.
  8. M. Gomez-Rodriguez et al., "Haptic feedback in motor imagery BCI enhances mu rhythm modulations and classification accuracy," Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 15, Art. 642546, 2021.
  9. K. McCreadie, H. C. Tan, and E. A. Hurley, "Haptic exercise devices for robot-assisted arm rehabilitation," Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 287-295, 2022.
  10. J. Snell, K. Swersky, and R. Zemel, "Prototypical networks for few-shot learning," in Proc. NeurIPS, 2017, pp. 4077-4087.
  11. M. Cheng et al., "EEG-based motor imagery classification with deep learning," IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 178063-178074, 2020.
  12. F. Lotte et al., "A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces: A 10-year update," Journal of Neural Engineering, vol. 15, no. 3, Art. 031005, 2018.
  13. K. K. Ang et al., "Filter bank common spatial pattern algorithm on BCI competition IV datasets 2a and 2b," Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 6, Art. 39, 2012.
  14. T. N. Sainburg et al., "Separability of motor imagery signals across anatomical regions," Journal of Neurophysiology, vol. 125, no. 3, pp. 891-903, 2021.
  15. A.Bangor, P. Kortum, and J. Miller, "An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale," International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 574-594, 2008.
  16. G. Fugl-Meyer et al., "The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: A method for evaluation of physical performance," Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 13-31, 1975.
  17. B. J. Choi and J. H. Kim, "Edge computing architectures for real-time biomedical signal processing: A survey," IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 12086-12105, 2021.
  18. S. S. Chen et al., "Transfer learning and domain adaptation for EEG-based BCI: A comprehensive review," Neurocomputing, vol. 484, pp. 215-231, 2022.