Cargando…

Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grech, Roberta, Cassar, Tracey, Muscat, Joseph, Camilleri, Kenneth P, Fabri, Simon G, Zervakis, Michalis, Xanthopoulos, Petros, Sakkalis, Vangelis, Vanrumste, Bart
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2605581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18990257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-5-25
_version_ 1782162866930974720
author Grech, Roberta
Cassar, Tracey
Muscat, Joseph
Camilleri, Kenneth P
Fabri, Simon G
Zervakis, Michalis
Xanthopoulos, Petros
Sakkalis, Vangelis
Vanrumste, Bart
author_facet Grech, Roberta
Cassar, Tracey
Muscat, Joseph
Camilleri, Kenneth P
Fabri, Simon G
Zervakis, Michalis
Xanthopoulos, Petros
Sakkalis, Vangelis
Vanrumste, Bart
author_sort Grech, Roberta
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Text
id pubmed-2605581
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26055812008-12-19 Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis Grech, Roberta Cassar, Tracey Muscat, Joseph Camilleri, Kenneth P Fabri, Simon G Zervakis, Michalis Xanthopoulos, Petros Sakkalis, Vangelis Vanrumste, Bart J Neuroeng Rehabil Review 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. BioMed Central 2008-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2605581/ /pubmed/18990257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-5-25 Text en Copyright © 2008 Grech et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Grech, Roberta
Cassar, Tracey
Muscat, Joseph
Camilleri, Kenneth P
Fabri, Simon G
Zervakis, Michalis
Xanthopoulos, Petros
Sakkalis, Vangelis
Vanrumste, Bart
Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title_full Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title_fullStr Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title_full_unstemmed Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title_short Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis
title_sort review on solving the inverse problem in eeg source analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2605581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18990257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-5-25
work_keys_str_mv AT grechroberta reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT cassartracey reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT muscatjoseph reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT camillerikennethp reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT fabrisimong reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT zervakismichalis reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT xanthopoulospetros reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT sakkalisvangelis reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis
AT vanrumstebart reviewonsolvingtheinverseproblemineegsourceanalysis