Literature DB >> 7681385

Insidious errors in dipole localization parameters at a single time-point due to model misspecification of number of shells.

Z Zhang1, D L Jewett.   

Abstract

Insidious errors (unexpected and difficult-to-detect under usual conditions) were found using a single time-point dipole localization method, when two dipoles were simultaneously active and there was misspecification of the number of shells (usually intended to mimic the conductivity differences of the brain, skull, and scalp). The errors involved all dipole parameters (i.e., location, orientation, and magnitude). Potentials at 65 "electrode" locations on the surface of a 3-shell sphere were computed for dipoles of known location, orientation, and magnitude. These "maps" were then used to compute the best-least-squares-fit of the surface potentials based upon dipole parameters in a 1-shell sphere when either one or two dipoles were active. The dipole parameters were often significantly different when computed with two equal-magnitude dipoles active, compared with only one dipole, with location errors of 0-36 mm, orientation errors of 0-63 degrees, and magnitude errors of 2-98%. When the two dipole magnitudes were not the same, the errors in the computed dipole parameters were even larger. All these errors occurred when the LSE (least-square-error) was small and at or near minimum. Moreover, location errors increased as LSE decreased over iterations. These errors generally occur because the fitted dipole parameters under different potential maps do not obey the superposition law when there is shell model misspecification, which is also the reason that presently used "correction" methods cannot satisfactorily remove these errors from the analyses. This problem must be dealt with when analyzing evoked response "maps" from simultaneously active generators, if correspondence to anatomy and physiology is desired.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 7681385     DOI: 10.1016/0168-5597(93)90022-h

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0013-4694


  11 in total

1.  Effects of tissue resistivities on electroencephalogram sensitivity distribution.

Authors:  P Laarne; P Kauppinen; J Hyttinen; J Malmivuo; H Eskola
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Neuroelectromagnetic forward head modeling toolbox.

Authors:  Zeynep Akalin Acar; Scott Makeig
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2010-05-08       Impact factor: 2.390

3.  DSL and MUSIC under model misspecification and noise-conditions.

Authors:  Z Zhang; D L Jewett
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.020

4.  Some limitations of spatio temporal source models.

Authors:  D Cabrera Fernández; R Grave de Peralta Menéndez; S L González Andino
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.020

5.  Equivalent source estimation of scalp potential fields contaminated by heteroscedastic and correlated noise.

Authors:  H M Huizenga; P C Molenaar
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.020

6.  The usefulness of the Laplacian in principal component analysis and dipole source localization.

Authors:  S A Klein; T Carney
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.020

7.  A connectionist modeling study of the neural mechanisms underlying pain's ability to reorient attention.

Authors:  Robert Dowman; Benjamin Ritz; Kathleen Fowler
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Model misspecification detection by means of multiple generator errors, using the observed potential map.

Authors:  Z Zhang; D L Jewett
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.020

9.  Insidious errors in dipole parameters due to shell model misspecification using multiple time-points.

Authors:  Z Zhang; D L Jewett; G Goodwill
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.020

10.  On the calculation of magnetic fields based on multipole modeling of focal biological current sources.

Authors:  G Nolte; G Curio
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.