Skip to main content
Log in

Can we learn anything from single-channel unaveraged MEG data?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing & Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A method for the decomposition of single-channel unaveraged magnetoencephalographic (MEG) data into statistically independent components is presented. The study of MEG recordings is characterised by a host of difficulties, most of which stem from the inherently noisy recording process by which the data is obtained. MEG time series typically contain a mix of artifactual components from a variety of sources, and the isolation of interesting signals from this noise background poses a difficult problem. In this article, we present a novel approach combining the techniques of independent component analysis (ICA) and dynamical embedding, which can be used to extract and isolate components of interest from single-channel unaveraged MEG data. In our approach, the method of delays is proposed as a means of augmenting the single-channel data, thus, facilitating the application of ICA. Finally, because the single-channel approach yields no information regarding the physiological origins of extracted sources, we discuss a method by which extracted sources may be projected back into the multichannel measurement space, permitting an estimate of the respective spatial distributions to be obtained. The proposed methods are tested on three separate MEG channels and the results are presented and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5a, b
Fig. 6a, b

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Comon P (1994) Independent component analysis, a new concept? Signal Process 36(3):287–314

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Hyvarinen A, Oja E (2000) Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. Neural Netw 13:411–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Makeig S, Bell AJ, Jung TP, Sejnowski TJ (1996) Independent component analysis of electroencephalographic data. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 8:145–151

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vigario R, Jousmaki V, Hamalainen M, Hari R, Oja E (1998) Independent component analysis for identification of artifacts in magnetoencephalographic recordings. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 10:229–235

    Google Scholar 

  5. Takens F (1981) Detecting strange attractors in turbulence. In: Rand DA, Young LS (eds) Dynamical systems and turbulence, Warwick 1980. Lect Notes Math 898:366–381

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Hyvarinen A, Oja E (1997) A fast fixed-point algorithm for independent component analysis. Neural Comput 9:1483–1492

    Google Scholar 

  7. Casdagli MC, Iasemidis LD, Sackellares JC, Roper SN, Gilmore RL, Savit RS (1996) Characterizing nonlinearity in invasive EEG recordings from temporal lobe epilepsy. Physica D 99:381–399

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Palus M (1996) Nonlinearity in normal human EEG: cycles, temporal asymmetry, nonstationarity and randomness, not chaos. Biol Cybern 75(5):389–396

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Theiler J, Rapp PE (1996) Re-examination of the evidence for low-dimensional, nonlinear structure in the human electroencephalogram. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 98:213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. James C, Lowe D (2000) Using dynamical embedding to isolate seizure components in the ictal EEG. IEE Proc Sci Meas Technol 147(6):315–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kugiumtzis D (1996) State space reconstruction parameters in the analysis of chaotic time series—the role of the time window length. Physica D 95:13–28

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Golyandina N, Nekrutkin V, Zhigljavsky A (2001) Analysis of time series structure: SSA and related techniques. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  13. James C, Lowe D (2001) Single channel analysis of electromagnetic brain signals through ICA in a dynamical systems framework. In: Proceedings of the 23rd annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBS), Istanbul, Turkey, October 2001

  14. Woon WL, Lowe D (2001) A nonlinear dynamical systems approach to MEG signal processing: an example of brain source elicitation. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on neural networks and expert systems in medicine and healthcare (NNESMED 2001), Milos Island, Greece, June 2001

  15. Başar E, Başar-Eroglu C, Karakaş S, Schürmann M (1999) Are cognitive processes manifested in event-related gamma, alpha, theta and delta oscillations in the EEG? Neurosci Lett 259:165–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pernier J, Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O (1999) A ring-shaped distribution of dipoles as a source model of induced gamma-band activity. Clin Neurophysiol 110:660–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research detailed in this paper has been sponsored by the UK EPSRC grant GR/L94673. We thank the EPSRC for supporting this research. We also wish to thank the staff of the Clinical Neurophysiology Unit at Aston University, Birmingham for much-needed assistance and advice in the MEG data collection process, as well as regarding various MEG theoretical issues in general.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. L. Woon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woon, W.L., Lowe, D. Can we learn anything from single-channel unaveraged MEG data?. Neural Comput & Applic 13, 360–368 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-004-0432-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-004-0432-1

Keywords

Navigation