2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.11.058
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved EEG source localization with Bayesian uncertainty modelling of unknown skull conductivity

Abstract: Electroencephalography (EEG) source imaging is an ill-posed inverse problem that requires accurate conductivity modelling of the head tissues, especially the skull. Unfortunately, the conductivity values are difficult to determine in vivo. In this paper, we show that the exact knowledge of the skull conductivity is not always necessary when the Bayesian approximation error (BAE) approach 5 is exploited. In BAE, we first postulate a probability distribution for the skull conductivity that describes our (lack of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, even the state-of-the-art head-modeling approaches are only an approximation of the true individual anatomy. Known sources of inaccuracy include segmentation errors 41 , a limited number of tissue types 42 , and the use of standard, but possibly incorrect, conductivity values 43,44 . Despite these limitations, we remain convinced that computational models are invaluable for prospectively adjusting the stimulation intensities for rTMS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, even the state-of-the-art head-modeling approaches are only an approximation of the true individual anatomy. Known sources of inaccuracy include segmentation errors 41 , a limited number of tissue types 42 , and the use of standard, but possibly incorrect, conductivity values 43,44 . Despite these limitations, we remain convinced that computational models are invaluable for prospectively adjusting the stimulation intensities for rTMS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of note is that the skull conductivity and, therefore, the correct modeling is a pivotal point, which, due to head abnormalities or insufficient imaging tools, can be challenging to approximate [35]. To address this issue, Bayesian Approximation Error (BAE) approaches displayed high efficiency in reducing the source localization error by several millimeters, enhancing spatial accuracy, which is crucial in clinical applications [36].…”
Section: Forward Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On this premise, anatomical MRI could contribute to the correct solution of the forward (and as a result the inverse) problem, since the information concerning the thickness and conductivities of each head tissue is needed for the source localization computation [40]. For this reason, it is optimal to use subject-specific MRI in order to reconstruct the individual head model, additionally incorporating the anisotropic properties of the skull and white matter [36,98]. However, in several cases, individual MRI is unavailable or the head model cannot be created, due to brain abnormalities and impairments, such as brain malformation or tumors.…”
Section: Esi Challenges and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Known sources of inaccuracy include segmentation errors [42], a limited number of compartments, i.e. tissue types [43], and the use of standard, but possibly incorrect, conductivity values for these compartments [44,45]. Practical constraints on the implementation of the stimulation can further contribute to inaccuracies in the electric field calculations.…”
Section: Towards a Better Understanding Of The Neural Mechanisms Of Rtmsmentioning
confidence: 99%