Imaging brain source extent from EEG/MEG by means of an iteratively reweighted edge sparsity minimization (IRES) strategy
Open accessAbstract
Estimating extended brain sources using EEG/MEG source imaging techniques is challenging. EEG and MEG have excellent temporal resolution at millisecond scale but their spatial resolution is limited due to the volume conduction effect. We have exploited sparse signal processing techniques in this study to impose sparsity on the underlying source and its transformation in other domains (mathematical domains, like spatial gradient). Using an iterative reweighting strategy to penalize locations that are less likely to contain any source, it is shown that the proposed iteratively reweighted edge sparsity minimization (IRES) strategy can provide reasonable information regarding the location and extent of the underlying sources. This approach is unique in the sense that it estimates extended sources without the need of subjectively thresholding the solution. The performance of IRES was evaluated in a series of computer simulations. Different parameters such as source location and signal-to-noise ratio were varied and the estimated results were compared to the targets using metrics such as localization error (LE), area under curve (AUC) and overlap between the estimated and simulated sources. It is shown that IRES provides extended solutions which not only localize the source but also provide estimation for the source extent. The performance of IRES was further tested in epileptic patients undergoing intracranial EEG (iEEG) recording for pre-surgical evaluation. IRES was applied to scalp EEGs during interictal spikes, and results were compared with iEEG and surgical resection outcome in the patients. The pilot clinical study results are promising and demonstrate a good concordance between noninvasive IRES source estimation with iEEG and surgical resection outcomes in the same patients. The proposed algorithm, i.e. IRES, estimates extended source solutions from scalp electromagnetic signals which provide relatively accurate information about the location and extent of the underlying source.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Sparsity is often assumed to avoid over-fitting in inverse problems and has increasing applications in signal and image processing.
“Sparsity is often assumed to avoid over-fitting in inverse problems, and has increasing applications in signal and image processing (43, 50–54).”
From Electrophysiological source imaging: A noninvasive window to brain dynamics (2018) · cites this paper as [54]
Recent development in sparse electrophysiological source imaging algorithms suggests the capability of estimating both source locations and extents.
“Recent development in sparse ESI algorithms suggests the capability of estimating both the source locations and extents (54), reflecting the spatio-temporal characteristics of underlying brain sources and dynamics.”
From Electrophysiological source imaging: A noninvasive window to brain dynamics (2018) · cites this paper as [54]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 93 · Cited by 89
- Authors
- Sohrabpour, A., Lu, Y., Worrell, G., & He, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Corresponding author
- He, Bin
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-11
- Volume
- 142
- Pages
- 27-42
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5124544
- OpenAlex
- W2406007819
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 93
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 7.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (EB006433, EY023101, HL117664)
- NSF (CBET-1450956, CBET-1264782)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Direction-of-Arrival Estimation Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Sparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
- Keywords
- EEG source localization, MEG source imaging, sparse signal processing, volume conduction, intracranial EEG, interictal spikes, surgical resection outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Electroencephalography, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetoencephalography, Neuroimaging
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