Summary
This paper introduces the concept of the resolution matrix as the basis for an objective theoretical comparison of distributed linear inverse solutions to the neuroelectromagnetic inverse problem. In particular, we describe how figures of merit derived from the resolution matrices can be represented graphically to evaluate merits and shortcomings of the different solutions. The use of the figures of merit is illustrated with two solutions that consider minimal a priori information about the generators: Classical Minimum Norm and Backus Gilbert. We recommend to start any analysis with the individual exploration of the resolution kernel for each grid point or at least for those points where the activity is likely to occur. This analysis might help in selecting the optimal inverse for the sources that are supposed to be active in the process under study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Backus, G.E. and Gilbert, J.F. Numerical applications of a formalism for geophysical inverse problems. Geophys. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1967, 13:247–276.
Backus, G.E. and Gilbert, J.F. The resolving power of gross earth data. Geophys. J. Roy. Astron. Soc. 1968, 16:169–205.
Backus, G.E. and Gilbert, J.F. Uniquenness in the inversion of gross earth data. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 1970, 266:123–192.
Bertero, M., De Mol, C., Pike, E.R. Linear inverse problems with discrete data. I: General formulation and singular system analysis. Inverse Problem, 1985, 1: 301–330.
Brenner, D., Williamson, S.J. and Kauffman, L. Visually evoked magnetic fields of the human brain. Science, 1975, 190: 480–481.
Greenblatt, R.E. Probabilistic reconstruction of multiple sources in the neuroelectromagnetic inverse problem. Inverse Problems, 1993, 9: 271–284.
Hämäläinen, M.S. and Ilmoniemi, R.J. Interpreting measured magnetic fields of the brain: Estimates of Current Distributions., Technical Report TKK-F-A559, Helsinski University of Technology, 1984.
Hämäläinen, M. Interpretation of Neuromagnetic measurements: Modeling and Statistical Considerations. Ph. D. Thesis, Espoo, Finland, 1987.
Ilmoniemi, R.J. Estimates of Neuronal Current Distributions. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh). 1991, Suppl, 491: 80–87.
ISBET Newsletter. No 5. November 1994. Ed. W. Skrandies.
Jackson, D.D. Interpretation of Inaccurate, Insufficient and Inconsistent data. Geophys. J. Roy. Astron. soc., 1972, 28:97–110.
Menke, W. Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete inverse theory. Academic Press, 1984.
O'Sullivan F. A Statistical perspective on ill-posed inverse problems. 1986, 1. No. 4, 502–527.
Peng, C., Rodi, W. and Toksoz, M.N. Smoothest-model reconstruction from projections. Inverse Problem, 1993, 9:339–354.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Klinische Forschergruppe “Biomagnetismus and Biosignalanalyse”). Partial support was received from Swiss National Foundation grant 4038-044081/1.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
de Peralta Menendez, R.G., Gonzalez Andino, S.L. & Lütkenhöner, B. Figures of merit to compare distributed linear inverse solutions. Brain Topogr 9, 117–124 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01200711
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01200711