Abstract
Despite numerous important contributions, the investigation of brain connectivity with magnetoencephalography (MEG) still faces multiple challenges. One critical aspect of source-level connectivity, largely overlooked in the literature, is the putative effect of the choice of the inverse method on the subsequent cortico-cortical coupling analysis. We set out to investigate the impact of three inverse methods on source coherence detection using simulated MEG data. To this end, thousands of randomly located pairs of sources were created. Several parameters were manipulated, including inter- and intra-source correlation strength, source size and spatial configuration. The simulated pairs of sources were then used to generate sensor-level MEG measurements at varying signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). Next, the source level power and coherence maps were calculated using three methods (a) L2-Minimum-Norm Estimate (MNE), (b) Linearly Constrained Minimum Variance (LCMV) beamforming, and (c) Dynamic Imaging of Coherent Sources (DICS) beamforming. The performances of the methods were evaluated using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves. The results indicate that beamformers perform better than MNE for coherence reconstructions if the interacting cortical sources consist of point-like sources. On the other hand, MNE provides better connectivity estimation than beamformers, if the interacting sources are simulated as extended cortical patches, where each patch consists of dipoles with identical time series (high intra-patch coherence). However, the performance of the beamformers for interacting patches improves substantially if each patch of active cortex is simulated with only partly coherent time series (partial intra-patch coherence). These results demonstrate that the choice of the inverse method impacts the results of MEG source-space coherence analysis, and that the optimal choice of the inverse solution depends on the spatial and synchronization profile of the interacting cortical sources. The insights revealed here can guide method selection and help improve data interpretation regarding MEG connectivity estimation.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
