The Dynamic Beamformer

Beamforming is one of the most commonly used methods for estimating the active neural sources from the MEG or EEG sensor readings. The basic assumption in beamforming is that the sources are uncorrelated, which allows for estimating each source independent of the others. In this paper, we incorporate the independence assumption of the standard beamformer in a linear dynamical system, thereby introducing the dynamic beamformer. Using empirical data, we show that the dynamic beamformer outperforms the standard beamformer in predicting the condition of interest which strongly suggests that it also outperforms the standard method in localizing the active neural generators.

[1]  E. Halgren,et al.  Dynamic Statistical Parametric Mapping Combining fMRI and MEG for High-Resolution Imaging of Cortical Activity , 2000, Neuron.

[2]  W. Drongelen,et al.  Localization of brain electrical activity via linearly constrained minimum variance spatial filtering , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  Motoaki Kawanabe,et al.  Modeling Sparse Connectivity Between Underlying Brain Sources for EEG/MEG , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  Michael S. Beauchamp,et al.  A Parametric fMRI Study of Overt and Covert Shifts of Visuospatial Attention , 2001, NeuroImage.

[5]  Javier M. Antelis,et al.  Dynamic solution to the EEG source localization problem using kalman filters and particle filters , 2009, 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[6]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[7]  Robert Oostenveld,et al.  Using Brain–Computer Interfaces and Brain-State Dependent Stimulation as Tools in Cognitive Neuroscience , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[8]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  MEG source localization under multiple constraints: An extended Bayesian framework , 2006, NeuroImage.

[9]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics) , 2006 .

[10]  A. Dale,et al.  Improved Localizadon of Cortical Activity by Combining EEG and MEG with MRI Cortical Surface Reconstruction: A Linear Approach , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  Javier M. Antelis,et al.  DYNAMO: Dynamic multi-model source localization method for EEG and/or MEG , 2010, 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology.

[12]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  A Unifying Review of Linear Gaussian Models , 1999, Neural Computation.

[13]  T. Heskes,et al.  Covert attention allows for continuous control of brain–computer interfaces , 2010, The European journal of neuroscience.

[14]  David P. Wipf,et al.  A unified Bayesian framework for MEG/EEG source imaging , 2009, NeuroImage.

[15]  Nasser M. Nasrabadi,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2006, Technometrics.

[16]  J Gross,et al.  REPRINTS , 1962, The Lancet.

[17]  G. Nolte.  The magnetic lead field theorem in the quasi-static approximation and its use for magnetoencephalography forward calculation in realistic volume conductors. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  Robert Oostenveld,et al.  FieldTrip: Open Source Software for Advanced Analysis of MEG, EEG, and Invasive Electrophysiological Data , 2010, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[19]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Variational Bayesian inference for fMRI time series , 2003, NeuroImage.