Halder, Tamesh and Talwar, Siddharth and Jaiswal, Amit Kumar and Banerjee, Arpan (2019) Quantitative Evaluation in Estimating Sources Underlying Brain Oscillations Using Current Source Density Methods and Beamformer Approaches. eNeuro, 6 (4).

Preview

Text ENEURO.0170-19.2019.full.pdf Download (1048Kb) | Preview

Abstract

Brain oscillations from EEG and MEG shed light on neurophysiological mechanisms of human behavior. However, to extract information on cortical processing, researchers have to rely on source localization methods that can be very broadly classified into current density estimates such as exact low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (eLORETA), minimum norm estimates (MNE), and beamformers such as dynamic imaging of coherent sources (DICS) and linearly constrained minimum variance (LCMV). These algorithms produce a distributed map of brain activity underlying sustained and transient responses during neuroimaging studies of behavior. On the other hand, there are very few comparative analyses that evaluates the “ground truth detection” capabilities of these methods. The current article evaluates the reliability in estimation of sources of spectral event generators in the cortex using a two-pronged approach. First, simulated EEG data with point dipoles and distributed dipoles are used to validate the accuracy and sensitivity of each one of these methods of source localization. The abilities of the techniques were tested by comparing the localization error, focal width, false positive (FP) ratios while detecting already known location of neural activity generators under varying signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Second, empirical EEG data during auditory steady state responses (ASSRs) in human participants were used to compare the distributed nature of source localization. All methods were successful in recovery of point sources in favorable signal to noise scenarios and could achieve high hit rates if FPs are ignored. Interestingly, focal activation map is generated by LCMV and DICS when compared to eLORETA while control of FPs is much superior in eLORETA. Subsequently drawbacks and strengths of each method are highlighted with a detailed discussion on how to choose a technique based on empirical requirements.

Item Type:	Article
Subjects:	Neurodegenerative Disorders Neuro-Oncological Disorders Neurocognitive Processes Neuronal Development and Regeneration Informatics and Imaging Genetics and Molecular Biology
Depositing User:	Dr. D.D. Lal
Date Deposited:	06 Sep 2019 06:07
Last Modified:	13 Dec 2021 05:28
URI:	http://nbrc.sciencecentral.in/id/eprint/513

Actions (login required)

View Item