Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 362

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of different cortical connectivity estimators for high‐resolution EEG recordings

Open access
Astolfi, Laura, Cincotti, Febo, Mattia, Donatella, Marciani, M. Grazia, Baccala, Luiz A., de Vico Fallani, Fabrizio, Salinari, Serenella, Ursino, Mauro, Zavaglia, Melissa, Ding, Lei, Edgar, J. Christopher, Miller, Gregory A., He, Bin, Babiloni, Fabio·2007·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

The aim of this work is to characterize quantitatively the performance of a body of techniques in the frequency domain for the estimation of cortical connectivity from high‐resolution EEG recordings in different operative conditions commonly encountered in practice. Connectivity pattern estimators investigated are the Directed Transfer Function (DTF), its modification known as direct DTF (dDTF) and the Partial Directed Coherence (PDC). Predefined patterns of cortical connectivity were simulated and then retrieved by the application of the DTF, dDTF, and PDC methods. Signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and length (LENGTH) of EEG epochs were studied as factors affecting the reconstruction of the imposed connectivity patterns. Reconstruction quality and error rate in estimated connectivity patterns were evaluated by means of some indexes of quality for the reconstructed connectivity pattern. The error functions were statistically analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA). The whole methodology was then applied to high‐resolution EEG data recorded during the well‐known Stroop paradigm. Simulations indicated that all three methods correctly estimated the simulated connectivity patterns under reasonable conditions. However, performance of the methods differed somewhat as a function of SNR and LENGTH factors. The methods were generally equivalent when applied to the Stroop data. In general, the amount of available EEG affected the accuracy of connectivity pattern estimations. Analysis of 27 s of nonconsecutive recordings with an SNR of 3 or more ensured that the connectivity pattern could be accurately recovered with an error below 7% for the PDC and 5% for the DTF. In conclusion, functional connectivity patterns of cortical activity can be effectively estimated under general conditions met in most EEG recordings by combining high‐resolution EEG techniques, linear inverse estimation of the cortical activity, and frequency domain multivariate methods such as PDC, DTF, and dDTF. Hum. Brain Mapp, 2007. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.20263

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 362

Metadata

Authors
Astolfi, L., Cincotti, F., Mattia, D., Marciani, M. G., Baccala, L. A., de Vico Fallani, F., Salinari, S., Ursino, M., Zavaglia, M., Ding, L., Edgar, J. C., Miller, G. A., He, B., & Babiloni, F.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-06-07
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
143-157
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W2137680378
Cited by
362
References
10
FWCI
7.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of different cortical connectivity estimators for high‐resolution EEG recordings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hbm.20263
The paper
Astolfi, L., Cincotti, F., Mattia, D., Marciani, M. G., Baccala, L. A., de Vico Fallani, F., Salinari, S., Ursino, M., Zavaglia, M., Ding, L., Edgar, J. C., Miller, G. A., He, B., & Babiloni, F. (2007). Comparison of different cortical connectivity estimators for high‐resolution EEG recordings. Human Brain Mapping. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20263

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.