Rhythmic entrainment source separation: Optimizing analyses of neural responses to rhythmic sensory stimulation

ABSTRACT Steady‐state evoked potentials (SSEPs) are rhythmic brain responses to rhythmic sensory stimulation, and are often used to study perceptual and attentional processes. We present a data analysis method for maximizing the signal‐to‐noise ratio of the narrow‐band steady‐state response in the frequency and time‐frequency domains. The method, termed rhythmic entrainment source separation (RESS), is based on denoising source separation approaches that take advantage of the simultaneous but differential projection of neural activity to multiple electrodes or sensors. Our approach is a combination and extension of existing multivariate source separation methods. We demonstrate that RESS performs well on both simulated and empirical data, and outperforms conventional SSEP analysis methods based on selecting electrodes with the strongest SSEP response, as well as several other linear spatial filters. We also discuss the potential confound of overfitting, whereby the filter captures noise in absence of a signal. Matlab scripts are available to replicate and extend our simulations and methods. We conclude with some practical advice for optimizing SSEP data analyses and interpreting the results. HIGHLIGHTSSteady‐state evoked potentials are neural responses to rhythmic sensory stimuli.We present a spatial filtering method (termed RESS) that optimizes EEG SSEP analyses.RESS boosts signal‐to‐noise and accurately reconstructs simulated SSEP time courses.RESS detects temporal nonstationarities, thus increasing experiment flexibility.

[1]  Justin M. Ales,et al.  The steady-state visual evoked potential in vision research: A review. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[2]  Gennadiy Gurariy,et al.  The steady-state visual evoked potential reveals neural correlates of the items encoded into visual working memory , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  A. Cichocki,et al.  Steady-state visually evoked potentials: Focus on essential paradigms and future perspectives , 2010, Progress in Neurobiology.

[4]  Annabelle Blangero,et al.  Exploiting individual primary visual cortex geometry to boost steady state visual evoked potentials , 2013, Journal of neural engineering.

[5]  Jean-Franois Cardoso High-Order Contrasts for Independent Component Analysis , 1999, Neural Computation.

[6]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Analyzing Neural Time Series Data: Theory and Practice , 2014 .

[7]  P. Nunez,et al.  Comparison of the effect of volume conduction on EEG coherence with the effect of field spread on MEG coherence , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  A. de Cheveigné,et al.  Scanning for oscillations , 2015, Journal of neural engineering.

[9]  Jacek Dmochowski,et al.  Maximally reliable spatial filtering of steady state visual evoked potentials , 2014, NeuroImage.

[10]  Søren K. Andersen,et al.  Effects of Feature-selective and Spatial Attention at Different Stages of Visual Processing , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  M. Fuchs,et al.  A standardized boundary element method volume conductor model , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[12]  Bruno Rossion,et al.  A steady-state visual evoked potential approach to individual face perception: Effect of inversion, contrast-reversal and temporal dynamics , 2012, NeuroImage.

[13]  Lucas C. Parra,et al.  Joint decorrelation, a versatile tool for multichannel data analysis , 2014, NeuroImage.

[14]  Kazumichi Matsumiya,et al.  Time Courses of Attentional Modulation in Neural Amplification and Synchronization Measured with Steady-state Visual-evoked Potentials , 2012, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[15]  Marcia Grabowecky,et al.  Attention induces synchronization-based response gain in steady-state visual evoked potentials , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  Dimensionality reduction for the analysis of brain oscillations , 2014, NeuroImage.

[17]  Nikolaus Kriegeskorte,et al.  Perceptual similarity of visual patterns predicts dynamic neural activation patterns measured with MEG , 2016, NeuroImage.

[18]  T. Wilson,et al.  Presence of strong harmonics during visual entrainment: A magnetoencephalography study , 2012, Biological Psychology.

[19]  J D Victor,et al.  Fluctuations of steady-state VEPs: interaction of driven evoked potentials and the EEG. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[20]  Harri Valpola,et al.  Denoising Source Separation , 2005, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[21]  Ramesh Srinivasan,et al.  Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials: Distributed Local Sources and Wave-Like Dynamics Are Sensitive to Flicker Frequency , 2006, Brain Topography.

[22]  Jürgen Kayser,et al.  Hemifield-dependent N1 and event-related theta/delta oscillations: An unbiased comparison of surface Laplacian and common EEG reference choices. , 2015, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[23]  Floris P. de Lange,et al.  Local Entrainment of Alpha Oscillations by Visual Stimuli Causes Cyclic Modulation of Perception , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  Regularizing Common Spatial Patterns to Improve BCI Designs: Unified Theory and New Algorithms , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[25]  Søren K. Andersen,et al.  Attentional bias of competitive interactions in neuronal networks of early visual processing in the human brain , 2008, NeuroImage.

[26]  Nathan Weisz,et al.  Large-scale network-level processes during entrainment , 2016, Brain Research.

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

[28]  L. Carmant,et al.  Interaction between the flash evoked SSVEPs and the spontaneous EEG activity in children and adults , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[29]  S. Andersen,et al.  Behavioral performance follows the time course of neural facilitation and suppression during cued shifts of feature-selective attention , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  A. Antal,et al.  Transcranial Alternating Current and Random Noise Stimulation: Possible Mechanisms , 2016, Neural plasticity.

[31]  Hedderik van Rijn,et al.  Dissociable mechanisms underlying individual differences in visual working memory capacity , 2014, NeuroImage.

[32]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Modification of Brain Oscillations via Rhythmic Light Stimulation Provides Evidence for Entrainment but Not for Superposition of Event-Related Responses , 2016, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[33]  Jasna Martinovic,et al.  Bottom-Up Biases in Feature-Selective Attention , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  R. Oostenveld,et al.  Independent EEG Sources Are Dipolar , 2012, PloS one.

[35]  Susan L. Travis,et al.  Neural Responses to Target Features outside a Search Array Are Enhanced during Conjunction but Not Unique-Feature Search , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[36]  P. Suffczynski,et al.  On the Quantification of SSVEP Frequency Responses in Human EEG in Realistic BCI Conditions , 2013, PloS one.

[37]  Marcia Grabowecky,et al.  Differential Roles of Frequency-following and Frequency-doubling Visual Responses Revealed by Evoked Neural Harmonics , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[38]  Srikantan S. Nagarajan,et al.  Source Localization of EEG/MEG Data by Correlating Columns of ICA and Lead Field Matrices , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[39]  Søren K. Andersen,et al.  Competitive effects on steady-state visual evoked potentials with frequencies in- and outside the alpha band , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[40]  Gabriel Curio,et al.  A novel method for reliable and fast extraction of neuronal EEG/MEG oscillations on the basis of spatio-spectral decomposition , 2011, NeuroImage.

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

[42]  Lucas C. Parra,et al.  Blind Source Separation via Generalized Eigenvalue Decomposition , 2003, J. Mach. Learn. Res..