Brain Activity Mapping from MEG Data via a Hierarchical Bayesian Algorithm with Automatic Depth Weighting

A recently proposed iterated alternating sequential (IAS) MEG inverse solver algorithm, based on the coupling of a hierarchical Bayesian model with computationally efficient Krylov subspace linear solver, has been shown to perform well for both superficial and deep brain sources. However, a systematic study of its ability to correctly identify active brain regions is still missing. We propose novel statistical protocols to quantify the performance of MEG inverse solvers, focusing in particular on how their accuracy and precision at identifying active brain regions. We use these protocols for a systematic study of the performance of the IAS MEG inverse solver, comparing it with three standard inversion methods, wMNE, dSPM, and sLORETA. To avoid the bias of anecdotal tests towards a particular algorithm, the proposed protocols are Monte Carlo sampling based, generating an ensemble of activity patches in each brain region identified in a given atlas. The performance in correctly identifying the active areas is measured by how much, on average, the reconstructed activity is concentrated in the brain region of the simulated active patch. The analysis is based on Bayes factors, interpreting the estimated current activity as data for testing the hypothesis that the active brain region is correctly identified, versus the hypothesis of any erroneous attribution. The methodology allows the presence of a single or several simultaneous activity regions, without assuming that the number of active regions is known. The testing protocols suggest that the IAS solver performs well with both with cortical and subcortical activity estimation.

[1]  Barbara Vantaggi,et al.  Bayes meets Krylov: preconditioning CGLS for underdetermined systems , 2015, 1503.06844.

[2]  Romain Brette,et al.  Handbook of neural activity measurement , 2012 .

[3]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Magnetoencephalography-theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain , 1993 .

[4]  Julia P. Owen,et al.  Robust Bayesian estimation of the location, orientation, and time course of multiple correlated neural sources using MEG , 2010, NeuroImage.

[5]  Olivier D. Faugeras,et al.  A common formalism for the Integral formulations of the forward EEG problem , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  Jouko Lampinen,et al.  Bayesian analysis of the neuromagnetic inverse problem with ℓ p -norm priors , 2005, NeuroImage.

[7]  Martin Luessi,et al.  MNE software for processing MEG and EEG data , 2014, NeuroImage.

[8]  M. S. Hämäläinen,et al.  Quantification of the benefit from integrating MEG and EEG data in minimum ℓ2-norm estimation , 2008, NeuroImage.

[9]  Christian Barillot,et al.  Atlas-based segmentation of 3D cerebral structures with competitive level sets and fuzzy control , 2009, Medical Image Anal..

[10]  Masa-aki Sato,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian estimation for MEG inverse problem , 2004, NeuroImage.

[11]  Martin Burger,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian inference for the EEG inverse problem using realistic FE head models: Depth localization and source separation for focal primary currents , 2012, NeuroImage.

[12]  Anders M. Dale,et al.  Cortical Surface-Based Analysis I. Segmentation and Surface Reconstruction , 1999, NeuroImage.

[13]  R. Pascual-Marqui Review of methods for solving the EEG inverse problem , 1999 .

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

[15]  Bhaskar D. Rao,et al.  Sparse signal reconstruction from limited data using FOCUSS: a re-weighted minimum norm algorithm , 1997, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[16]  Jouko Lampinen,et al.  Automatic relevance determination based hierarchical Bayesian MEG inversion in practice , 2007, NeuroImage.

[17]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  Electromagnetic brain mapping , 2001, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[18]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Selecting forward models for MEG source-reconstruction using model-evidence , 2009, NeuroImage.

[19]  Lourens J. Waldorp,et al.  Spatiotemporal EEG/MEG source analysis based on a parametric noise covariance model , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[20]  Thomas R. Knösche,et al.  A guideline for head volume conductor modeling in EEG and MEG , 2014, NeuroImage.

[21]  Nelson J. Trujillo-Barreto,et al.  Bayesian model averaging in EEG/MEG imaging , 2004, NeuroImage.

[22]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Algorithmic procedures for Bayesian MEG/EEG source reconstruction in SPM , 2014, NeuroImage.

[23]  Anders M. Dale,et al.  An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest , 2006, NeuroImage.

[24]  A. Dale,et al.  Distributed current estimates using cortical orientation constraints , 2006, Human brain mapping.

[25]  Giovanni Pellegrino,et al.  Comparison of the spatial resolution of source imaging techniques in high-density EEG and MEG , 2017, NeuroImage.

[26]  J. Mäkelä,et al.  Sources of auditory brainstem responses revisited: Contribution by magnetoencephalography , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[27]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  Brainstorm: A User-Friendly Application for MEG/EEG Analysis , 2011, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[28]  E. Somersalo,et al.  Visualization of Magnetoencephalographic Data Using Minimum Current Estimates , 1999, NeuroImage.

[29]  A. Scott,et al.  MEG-SIM: A Web Portal for Testing MEG Analysis Methods using Realistic Simulated and Empirical Data , 2011, Neuroinformatics.

[30]  Jouko Lampinen,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian estimates of distributed MEG sources: Theoretical aspects and comparison of variational and MCMC methods , 2007, NeuroImage.

[31]  Manfred Fuchs,et al.  Evaluation of sLORETA in the Presence of Noise and Multiple Sources , 2003, Brain Topography.

[32]  A. Friederici,et al.  Head models and dynamic causal modeling of subcortical activity using magnetoencephalographic/electroencephalographic data , 2012, Reviews in the neurosciences.

[33]  J.C. de Munck,et al.  A random dipole model for spontaneous brain activity , 1992, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[34]  Barbara Vantaggi,et al.  Bayes Meets Krylov: Statistically Inspired Preconditioners for CGLS , 2018, SIAM Rev..

[35]  Seppo P. Ahlfors,et al.  Assessing and improving the spatial accuracy in MEG source localization by depth-weighted minimum-norm estimates , 2006, NeuroImage.

[36]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Bayesian model selection for group studies , 2009, NeuroImage.

[37]  Théodore Papadopoulo,et al.  OpenMEEG: opensource software for quasistatic bioelectromagnetics , 2010, Biomedical engineering online.

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

[39]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Variational Bayesian inversion of the equivalent current dipole model in EEG/MEG , 2008, NeuroImage.

[40]  Fernando Flores-Mangas,et al.  Classification of anatomical structures in mr brain images using fuzzy parameters , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[41]  Julia P. Owen,et al.  Performance evaluation of the Champagne source reconstruction algorithm on simulated and real M/EEG data , 2012, NeuroImage.

[42]  Kensuke Sekihara,et al.  Controlled Support MEG imaging , 2006, NeuroImage.

[43]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Parametric Empirical Bayesian framework for fMRI‐constrained MEG/EEG source reconstruction , 2010, Human brain mapping.

[44]  Barbara Vantaggi,et al.  A hierarchical Krylov–Bayes iterative inverse solver for MEG with physiological preconditioning , 2015 .

[45]  Y. Attal,et al.  Assessment of Subcortical Source Localization Using Deep Brain Activity Imaging Model with Minimum Norm Operators: A MEG Study , 2013, PloS one.

[46]  M. E. Spencer,et al.  Error bounds for EEG and MEG dipole source localization. , 1993, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[47]  Harri Hakula,et al.  Conditionally Gaussian Hypermodels for Cerebral Source Localization , 2008, SIAM J. Imaging Sci..

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