Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Eccentric spheres models of the head.

B N Cuffin1

  • 1Francis Bitter National Magnet Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 02139.

IEEE Transactions on Bio-Medical Engineering
|September 1, 1991
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Experimental tests of EEG source localization accuracy in realistically shaped head models.

Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology·2001
Same author

Effects of modeling errors and EEG measurement montage on source localization accuracy.

Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society·2001
Same author

Experimental tests of EEG source localization accuracy in spherical head models.

Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology·2001
Same author

Accuracy of EEG dipole source localization using implanted sources in the human brain.

Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology·1999
Same author

EEG dipole source localization.

IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine : the quarterly magazine of the Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society·1998
Same author

Accuracy of electroencephalographic dipole localization of epileptiform activities associated with focal brain lesions.

Annals of neurology·1998

Variations in head models, including skull and scalp thickness and brain conductivity, minimally impact electroencephalogram and magnetoencephalogram spatial patterns. However, amplitudes are affected, with magnetic fields showing less sensitivity than electric potentials.

Area of Science:

  • Biophysics
  • Neuroscience
  • Medical Imaging

Background:

  • Electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) are crucial for understanding brain activity.
  • Accurate source localization relies on realistic head models.
  • Variations in individual head anatomy, such as skull and scalp thickness, can influence EEG/MEG signals.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of anatomical variations in eccentric spheres head models on EEG and MEG signals.
  • To quantify the effects of varying skull thickness, scalp thickness, and brain conductivity on signal patterns and amplitudes.
  • To compare the sensitivity of EEG and MEG to these anatomical variations for source localization.

Main Methods:

  • Derivation of mathematical equations for electric potentials (EEG) and magnetic fields (MEG) generated by dipolar sources.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Development of three eccentric spheres head models with variations in skull thickness, scalp thickness, and brain conductivity.
  • Analysis of the spatial patterns and amplitudes of EEG and MEG signals under varied model parameters.
  • Evaluation of the impact on source localization accuracy using inverse solutions.

    • Main Results:

    • Variations in skull thickness, scalp thickness, and brain conductivity had minimal effects on the general spatial patterns of EEG and MEG.
    • Significant amplitude variations were observed, with EEG amplitudes being more affected than MEG amplitudes by skull and scalp thickness variations.
    • Brain conductivity variations showed a moderate effect on both EEG and MEG amplitudes.
    • Source localization accuracy was less affected by these anatomical variations when using MEG compared to EEG.

    Conclusions:

    • Anatomical variations in head models have a limited impact on the spatial characteristics of EEG and MEG.
    • MEG signals are more robust to anatomical variations than EEG signals, particularly concerning amplitude and source localization.
    • These findings suggest that MEG may offer more reliable source localization in the presence of individual anatomical differences.