Cargando…

Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter

BACKGROUND: The electroencephalography (EEG) is an attractive and a simple technique to measure the brain activity. It is attractive due its excellent temporal resolution and simple due to its non-invasiveness and sensor design. However, the spatial resolution of EEG is reduced due to the low conduc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Subramaniyam, Narayan P, Väisänen, Outi RM, Wendel, Katrina E, Malmivuo, Jaakko AV
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2880801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20522265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-4631-4-S1-S4
_version_ 1782182052663132160
author Subramaniyam, Narayan P
Väisänen, Outi RM
Wendel, Katrina E
Malmivuo, Jaakko AV
author_facet Subramaniyam, Narayan P
Väisänen, Outi RM
Wendel, Katrina E
Malmivuo, Jaakko AV
author_sort Subramaniyam, Narayan P
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The electroencephalography (EEG) is an attractive and a simple technique to measure the brain activity. It is attractive due its excellent temporal resolution and simple due to its non-invasiveness and sensor design. However, the spatial resolution of EEG is reduced due to the low conducting skull. In this paper, we compute the potential distribution over the closed surface covering the brain (cortex) from the EEG scalp potential. We compare two methods – L-curve and generalised cross validation (GCV) used to obtain the regularisation parameter and also investigate the feasibility in applying such techniques to N170 component of the visually evoked potential (VEP) data. METHODS: Using the image data set of the visible human man (VHM), a finite difference method (FDM) model of the head was constructed. The EEG dataset (256-channel) used was the N170 component of the VEP. A forward transfer matrix relating the cortical potential to the scalp potential was obtained. Using Tikhonov regularisation, the potential distribution over the cortex was obtained. RESULTS: The cortical potential distribution for three subjects was solved using both L-curve and GCV method. A total of 18 cortical potential distributions were obtained (3 subjects with three stimuli each – fearful face, neutral face, control objects). CONCLUSIONS: The GCV method is a more robust method compared to L-curve to find the optimal regularisation parameter. Cortical potential imaging is a reliable method to obtain the potential distribution over cortex for VEP data.
format Text
id pubmed-2880801
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28808012010-06-04 Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter Subramaniyam, Narayan P Väisänen, Outi RM Wendel, Katrina E Malmivuo, Jaakko AV Nonlinear Biomed Phys Proceedings BACKGROUND: The electroencephalography (EEG) is an attractive and a simple technique to measure the brain activity. It is attractive due its excellent temporal resolution and simple due to its non-invasiveness and sensor design. However, the spatial resolution of EEG is reduced due to the low conducting skull. In this paper, we compute the potential distribution over the closed surface covering the brain (cortex) from the EEG scalp potential. We compare two methods – L-curve and generalised cross validation (GCV) used to obtain the regularisation parameter and also investigate the feasibility in applying such techniques to N170 component of the visually evoked potential (VEP) data. METHODS: Using the image data set of the visible human man (VHM), a finite difference method (FDM) model of the head was constructed. The EEG dataset (256-channel) used was the N170 component of the VEP. A forward transfer matrix relating the cortical potential to the scalp potential was obtained. Using Tikhonov regularisation, the potential distribution over the cortex was obtained. RESULTS: The cortical potential distribution for three subjects was solved using both L-curve and GCV method. A total of 18 cortical potential distributions were obtained (3 subjects with three stimuli each – fearful face, neutral face, control objects). CONCLUSIONS: The GCV method is a more robust method compared to L-curve to find the optimal regularisation parameter. Cortical potential imaging is a reliable method to obtain the potential distribution over cortex for VEP data. BioMed Central 2010-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC2880801/ /pubmed/20522265 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-4631-4-S1-S4 Text en Copyright ©2010 Subramaniyam 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 Proceedings
Subramaniyam, Narayan P
Väisänen, Outi RM
Wendel, Katrina E
Malmivuo, Jaakko AV
Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title_full Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title_fullStr Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title_full_unstemmed Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title_short Cortical potential imaging using L-curve and GCV method to choose the regularisation parameter
title_sort cortical potential imaging using l-curve and gcv method to choose the regularisation parameter
topic Proceedings
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2880801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20522265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-4631-4-S1-S4
work_keys_str_mv AT subramaniyamnarayanp corticalpotentialimagingusinglcurveandgcvmethodtochoosetheregularisationparameter
AT vaisanenoutirm corticalpotentialimagingusinglcurveandgcvmethodtochoosetheregularisationparameter
AT wendelkatrinae corticalpotentialimagingusinglcurveandgcvmethodtochoosetheregularisationparameter
AT malmivuojaakkoav corticalpotentialimagingusinglcurveandgcvmethodtochoosetheregularisationparameter