Advertisement

The Time-Varying Causal Coupling in Brain and Organization of Its Networks

Conference paper
  • 1.6k Downloads
Part of the Advances in Cognitive Neurodynamics book series (ICCN)

Abstract

For investigation of time-varying brain networks an approach based on estimation of causal coupling by means of multivariate method was applied. Two cognitive experiments: Constant Attention Test and Working Memory task are considered. Time varying version of a multivariate estimator—Directed Transfer Function was used for calculating dynamically changing patterns of transmission during the tasks. Well-defined centers of activity congruent with imaging, anatomical and electrophysiological evidence were found. These centers exchanged the information only during short epochs. The strengths of coupling inside the tightly connected modules and between them was found by means of assortative mixing. The results point out to the well determined, far from randomness structure of brain networks in cognitive tasks. Very dense and disorganized structure of networks reported in literature may be explained by the presence of spurious connections produced by bi-variate measures of connectivity and further enhanced by giving all connections equal weights.

Keywords

Functional connectivity Causal coupling Directed transfer function Working memory Dynamical EEG propagation Directed networks 

References

  1. 1.
    Kamiński, M. & Blinowska, K. J. 1991 A new method of the description of the information flow in brain structures. Biol Cybern. 65, 203–210.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Newman, M. E. J. 2003 Mixing patterns in networks. Phys. Rev. E 67, 026126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blinowska, K. J. & Kaminski, M. (2006) Multivariate Signal Analysis by parametric Models. In Handbook of Time Series Analysis (eds. B. Schelter, M. Winterhalder & J. Timmer), pp. 387–420. Wiley-VCH Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Blinowska, R. Kus, M. Kaminski, J. Janiszewska (2010) Transmission of Brain Activity During Cognitive Task. Brain Topography 23:205–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brzezicka, A., Kaminski, M., Kaminski, J. & Blinowska, K. J. (2010) Information transfer during transitive reasoning task. Brain Topography 24, 1–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brzezicka A, Sędek G, Marchewka A, Gola M, Jednoróg K, Królicki L, Wróbel A (2011) A role for the right prefrontal and bilateral parietal cortex in four-term transitive reasoning: An fMRI study with abstract linear syllogism tasks. Acta Neurobiol. Exp. 71 (4), 479–495.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blinowska K.J., Kaminski M., Brzezicka A., Kaminski J. (2013) Application of directed transfer function and network formalism for the assessment of functional connectivity in working memory task. Phil. Trans. Roy Soc. A. 371:20110674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Romo R, Brody CD, Hernandez A, Lemus L (1999) Neuronal correlates of parametric working memory in the prefrontal cortex. Nature 399(6735):470–473.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuś, R, Ginter J. Jr., Blinowska, K. J. (2006) Propagation of EEG activity during finger movement and its imagination. Acta Neurobiol Exp. 66(3), 195–206.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aron AR, Fletcher PC, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW (2003) Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nat Neurosci 6:115–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fried I, Katz A, McCarthy G, Sass KJ, Williamson P, Spencer SS, Spencer DD (1991) Functional organization of human supplementary motor cortex studied by electrical stimulation. J Neurosci 11:3656–3666.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burle B, Vidal F, Tandonnet C, Hasbroucq T (2004) Physiological evidence for response inhibition in choice reaction time tasks. Brain Cogn 56:153–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schinkel S, Zamora-López G, Dimigen O, Sommer W, Kurths J. (2011) Functional network analysis reveals differences in the semantic priming task J Neurosc. Meth. 107, 333–339.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cabeza R, Nyberg L (2000) Imaging condition II. An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 12, 1–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sauseng P, Klimesch W, Schabus M, Doppelmayr M (2005) Fronto-parietal coherence in theta and upper alpha reflect central executive functions of working memory. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 57(2), 97–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Micheloyannis S, Pachou E, Stam CJ, Vourkas M, Erimaki S, Tsirka V (2006) Using graph theoretical analysis of Multi channel EEG to evaluate the neural efficiency hypothesis. Neurosci. Lett. 402, 273–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kitzbichler MG, Henson RNA, Smith ML, Nathan PJ, Bullmore ET (2011) Cognitive effort drives workspace configuration of human brain functional networks, The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(22): 8259–8270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blinowska KJ, Kuś R, Kamiński M (2004) Granger causality and information flow in multivariate processes. Phys. Rev. E 70, 050902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kuś R, Kamiński M, Blinowska KJ (2004) Determination of EEG activity propagation: pair-wise versus multichannel estimate. IEEE. Trans. Biomed. Eng. 51, 1501–1510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PhysicsUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Interdysciplinary Center for Applied and Cognitive StudiesWarsaw School of Social Sciences and HumanitiesWarsawPoland
  3. 3.Department of NeurologyNencki Institute of Experimental BiologyWarsawPoland
  4. 4.Department of Biomedical Physics, Faculty of PhysicsUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations