Biological Cybernetics

, Volume 109, Issue 6, pp 627–637 | Cite as

Conditional Granger causality and partitioned Granger causality: differences and similarities

Original Article
  • 327 Downloads

Abstract

Neural information modeling and analysis often requires a measurement of the mutual influence among many signals. A common technique is the conditional Granger causality (cGC) which measures the influence of one time series on another time series in the presence of a third. Geweke has translated this condition into the frequency domain and has explored the mathematical relationships between the time and frequency domain expressions. Chen has observed that in practice, the expressions may return (meaningless) negative numbers, and has proposed an alternative which is based on a partitioned matrix scheme, which we call partitioned Granger causality (pGC). There has been some confusion in the literature about the relationship between cGC and pGC; some authors treat them as essentially identical measures, while others have noted that some properties (such as the relationship between the time and frequency domain expressions) do not hold for the pGC. This paper presents a series of matrix equalities that simplify the calculation of the pGC. In this simplified expression, the essential differences and similarities between the cGC and the pGC become clear; in essence, the pGC is dependent on only a subset of the parameters in the model estimation, and the noise residuals (which are uncorrelated in the cGC) need not be uncorrelated in the pGC. The mathematical results are illustrated with a simulation, and the measures are applied to an EEG dataset.

Keywords

Conditional Granger causality (cGC)  Partitioned Granger causality (pGC) Multivariate autoregressive (MVAR) model 

References

  1. Barnett L, Seth AK (2014) The MVGC multivariate Granger causality toolbox: a new approach to Granger-causal inference. J Neurosci Methods 223:50–68. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett L, Barrett AB, Seth AK (2009) Granger causality and transfer entropy are equivalent for gaussian variables. Phys Rev Lett 103(23):238701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernasconi C, König P (1999) On the directionality of cortical interactions studied by structural analysis of electrophysiological recordings. Biol Cybern 81:199–210. doi:10.1007/s004220050556 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bollimunta A, Chen Y, Schroeder CE, Ding M (2008) Neuronal mechanisms of cortical alpha oscillations in awake-behaving macaques. J Neurosci 28(40):9976–9988PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bressler SL, Richter CG, Chen Y, Ding M (2007) Cortical functional network organization from autoregressive modeling of local field potential oscillations. Stat Med 26:3875–3885. doi:10.1002/sim.2935 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brovelli A (2012) Statistical analysis of single-trial granger causality spectra. Comput Math Methods Med. doi:10.1155/2012/697610
  7. Chen Y, Bressler SL, Ding M (2006) Frequency decomposition of conditional Granger causality and application to multivariate neural field potential data. J Neurosci Methods 150(2): 228–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dhamala M, Rangarajan G, Ding M (2008) Analyzing information flow in brain networks with nonparametric Granger causality. Neuroimage 41(2):354–362PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Geweke J (1984a) Inference and causality in economic time series. Handb Econom II:1102–1143Google Scholar
  10. Geweke J (1984b) Measures of conditional linear dependence and feedback between time series. J Am Stat Assoc 79(388):907–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gourévitch B, Le Bouquin-Jeannès R, Faucon G (2006) Linear and nonlinear causality between signals: methods, examples and neurophysiological applications. Biol Cybern 95:349–369. doi:10.1007/s00422-006-0098-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Granger CWJ (1969) Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37(3):424–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kamiski M, Ding M, Truccolo WA, Bressler SL (2001) Evaluating causal relations in neural systems: Granger causality, directed transfer function and statistical assessment of significance. Biol Cybern 85:145–157. doi:10.1007/s004220000235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kolman B, Hill DR (2008) Elementary linear algebra with application, 9th edn. Pearson Education, PearsonGoogle Scholar
  15. Leung B, Cheung P, Riedner BA, Tononi G, Van Veen BD (2010) Estimation of cortical connectivity From EEG using state-space models. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 57(9):2122–2134. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5471144
  16. Liao W, Mantini D, Zhang Z, Pan Z, Ding J, Gong Q, Yang Y, Chen H (2010) Evaluating the effective connectivity of resting state networks using conditional Granger causality. Biol Cybern 102(1):57–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Malekpour S, Li Z, Cheung BLP, Castillo EM, Papanicolaou AC, Kramer LA, Fletcher JM, Van Veen BD (2012) Interhemispheric effective and functional cortical connectivity signatures of spina bifida are consistent with callosal anomaly. Brain Connect 2(3):142–154PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Omidvarnia A, Mesbah M, O’Toole JM, Colditz P, Boashash B (2011) Analysis of the time-varying cortical neural connectivity in the newborn EEG: a time-frequency approach. In: 7th international workshop on systems, signal processing and their applications (WoSSPA 2011), Tipaza. IEEE, pp 179–182. doi:10.1109/WOSSPA.2011.5931445
  19. Schelter B, Winterhalder M, Timmer J (2006) Handbook of time series analysis. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. doi:10.1002/9783527609970 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wang X, Chen Y, Bressler SL, Ding M (2007) Granger causality between multiple interdependent neurobiological time series: blockwise versus pairwise methods. Int J Neural Syst 17(2):71–78. doi:10.1142/S0129065707000944 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang F (2011) Matrix theory basic results and techniques, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhou Z, Chen Y, Ding M, Wright P, Lu Z, Liu Y (2009) Analyzing brain networks with PCA and conditional granger causality. Hum Brain Mapp 30:2197–2206. doi:10.1002/hbm.20661 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations