Abstract

In this primer, we give a review of the inverse problem for EEG source localization. This is intended for the researchers new in the field to get insight in the state-of-the-art techniques used to find approximate solutions of the brain sources giving rise to a scalp potential recording. Furthermore, a review of the performance results of the different techniques is provided to compare these different inverse solutions. The authors also include the results of a Monte-Carlo analysis which they performed to compare four non parametric algorithms and hence contribute to what is presently recorded in the literature. An extensive list of references to the work of other researchers is also provided.This paper starts off with a mathematical description of the inverse problem and proceeds to discuss the two main categories of methods which were developed to solve the EEG inverse problem, mainly the non parametric and parametric methods. The main difference between the two is to whether a fixed number of dipoles is assumed a priori or not. Various techniques falling within these categories are described including minimum norm estimates and their generalizations, LORETA, sLORETA, VARETA, S-MAP, ST-MAP, Backus-Gilbert, LAURA, Shrinking LORETA FOCUSS (SLF), SSLOFO and ALF for non parametric methods and beamforming techniques, BESA, subspace techniques such as MUSIC and methods derived from it, FINES, simulated annealing and computational intelligence algorithms for parametric methods. From a review of the performance of these techniques as documented in the literature, one could conclude that in most cases the LORETA solution gives satisfactory results. In situations involving clusters of dipoles, higher resolution algorithms such as MUSIC or FINES are however preferred. Imposing reliable biophysical and psychological constraints, as done by LAURA has given superior results. The Monte-Carlo analysis performed, comparing WMN, LORETA, sLORETA and SLF, for different noise levels and different simulated source depths has shown that for single source localization, regularized sLORETA gives the best solution in terms of both localization error and ghost sources. Furthermore the computationally intensive solution given by SLF was not found to give any additional benefits under such simulated conditions.

Highlights

  • Over the past few decades, a variety of techniques for noninvasive measurement of brain activity have been developed, one of which is source localization using electroencephalography (EEG)

  • The procedure of source localization works by first finding the scalp potentials that would result from hypothetical dipoles, or more generally from a current distribution inside the head – the forward problem; this is calculated or derived only once or several times depending on the approach used in the inverse problem and has been discussed in the corresponding review on solving the forward problem [2]

  • 3.1.5 Summary Refering to Equation (8), Table 1 summarizes the different weight matrices used in the algorithms

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Over the past few decades, a variety of techniques for noninvasive measurement of brain activity have been developed, one of which is source localization using electroencephalography (EEG) It uses measurements of the voltage potential at various locations on the scalp (in the order of microvolts (μV)) and applies signal processing techniques to estimate the current sources inside the brain that best fit this data. The standard adopted by Baillet et al in [4] is that spatial and temporal accuracy should be at least better than 5 mm and 5 ms, respectively In this primer, we give a review of the inverse problem in EEG source localization. We give a review of the inverse problem in EEG source localization It is intended for the researcher who is new in the field to get insight in the state-of-the-art techniques used to get approximate solutions.

Mathematical formulation
Inverse solutions
Regularization methods
Zero crossing
Minimal Product method
The algorithm is initialized with the minimum norm solution
The Backus-Gilbert method
The weight matrix Wj is defined by
Iterative Method
Performance analysis
The populations represent independent random samples
Discussion and conclusion
The solution of the LCMV problem min
10. De Munck JC
16. Kreyszig E
22. Hansen PC
27. Baillet S
Findings
32. Pascual-Marqui RD
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.