Accuracy of dipole source reconstruction in the 3-layerBEM model against the 5-layer BEM-FMM model
Nunez Ponasso, G. C.; McSweeney, R. C.; Wartman, W. A.; Lai, P.; Haueisen, J.; Maess, B.; Knosche, T.; Weise, K.; Noetscher, G.; Raij, T.; Makaroff, S. N.
Show abstract
ObjectiveTo compare cortical dipole fitting spatial accuracy between the widely used yet highly simplified 3-layer and modern more realistic 5-layer BEM-FMM models with and without adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) methods. MethodsWe generate simulated noiseless 256-channel EEG data from 5-layer (7-compartment) meshes of 15 subjects from the Connectome Young Adult dataset. For each subject, we test four dipole positions, three sets of conductivity values, and two types of head segmentation. We use the boundary element method (BEM) with fast multipole method (FMM) acceleration, with or without (AMR), for forward modeling. Dipole fitting is carried out with the FieldTrip MATLAB toolbox. ResultsThe average position error (across all tested dipoles, subjects, and models) is [~]4 mm, with a standard deviation of [~]2 mm. The orientation error is [~]20{degrees} on average, with a standard deviation of [~]15{degrees}. Without AMR, the numerical inaccuracies produce a larger disagreement between the 3- and 5-layer models, with an average position error of [~]8 mm (6 mm standard deviation), and an orientation error of 28{degrees} (28{degrees} standard deviation). ConclusionsThe low-resolution 3-layer models provide excellent accuracy in dipole localization. On the other hand, dipole orientation is retrieved less accurately. Therefore, certain applications may require more realistic models for practical source reconstruction. AMR is a critical component for improving the accuracy of forward EEG computations using a high-resolution 5-layer volume conduction model. SignificanceImproving EEG source reconstruction accuracy is important for several clinical applications, including epilepsy and other seizure-inducing conditions.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating the Influence of Anatomical Accuracy and Electrode Positions on EEG Forward Solutions 98%
- Fast and Accurate EEG/MEG BEM-Based Forward Problem Solution for High-Resolution Head Models 95%
- Sharing individualised template MRI data for MEG source reconstruction: a solution for open data while keeping subject confidentiality 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating functional EEG sources using topographical templates 96%
- Zapline-plus: a Zapline extension for automatic and adaptive removal of frequency-specific noise artifacts in M/EEG 94%
- A comparative study between state-of-the-art MRI deidentification and AnonyMI, a new method combining re-identification risk reduction and geometrical preservation 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.