Abstract
Neuroscience studies have provided highly detailed information about the anatomical and structural composition and organization of the brain, but insights into its functional principles are still lacking. To advance this understanding, scientists need to match their new research questions with instruments that provide information about the brain’s functionality at a sufficient level of detail with a potential to resolve the very rapidly evolving patterns of brain activity while also providing the necessary spatial detail and accuracy. Until 50 years ago, electroencephalography (EEG) was the only noninvasive technique capable of directly measuring neuronal activity with a millisecond time resolution. However, with the birth of magnetoencephalography (MEG), functional brain activity can now be resolved with this time resolution at a new level of spatial detail.
The use of MEG in practical studies began with the first real-time measurements in the beginning of the 1970s. During the following decade, multichannel MEG systems were developed in parallel with both investigations of normal brain activity and clinical studies, especially in epileptic patients. The first whole-head MEG system with more than 100 channels was introduced in 1992. By the end of the century, hundreds of such instruments had been delivered to researchers and clinicians worldwide. With vibrant interaction between neuroscientists, clinicians, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers, the experimental approaches and analysis methods were developed to establish MEG as an important method to study healthy and diseased brains. With the advent of low-noise room-temperature magnetic field sensors and novel analysis approaches, we are now at the verge of a revolution that will critically improve both the sensitivity and the spatial resolution of MEG and will especially advance its use in studies of early brain development and neurodegenerative disorders, as well as investigations of brain function in naturalistic situations and during interpersonal interactions. This chapter focuses on instrumentation and analysis tool developments, which have enabled and continue to enable MEG to flourish as a noninvasive tool to study brain function. The final section of this chapter offers lessons learned from seasoned investigators on conducting successful MEG studies, necessarily emphasizing additional issues such as the formulation of the research question and creation of experimental protocols.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Adrian D (1944) Brain rhythms. Nature 153:360–362
Agam Y et al.(2011) Multimodal neuroimaging dissociates hemodynamic and electrophysiological correlates of error processing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:17556–17561. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1103475108
Ahlfors S, Ilmoniemi R, Hämäläinen M (1992) Estimates of visually evoked cortical currents. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 82:225–236
Ahlfors SP, Han J, Lin FH, Witzel T, Belliveau JW, Hamalainen MS, Halgren E (2010) Cancellation of EEG and MEG signals generated by extended and distributed sources. Hum Brain Mapp 31:140–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20851
Ahveninen J et al.(2006) Task-modulated "what" and "where" pathways in human auditory cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:14608–14613
Aine C et al.(1996) Retinotopic organization of human visual cortex: Departures from the classical model. Cereb Cortex 6:354–361
Alexander GE, DeLong MR, Strick PL (1986) Parallel organization of functionally segregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci 9:357–381. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.09.030186.002041
Andersen LM et al.(2017) Similarities and differences between on-scalp and conventional in-helmet magnetoencephalography recordings. PLoS One 12:e0178602. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178602
Babadi B, Obregon-Henao G, Lamus C, Hamalainen MS, Brown EN, Purdon PL (2014) A Subspace Pursuit-based Iterative Greedy Hierarchical solution to the neuromagnetic inverse problem. NeuroImage 87:427–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.008
Baillet S (2017) Magnetoencephalography for brain electrophysiology and imaging. Nat Neurosci 20:327–339. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4504
Baillet S, Mosher JC, Leahy RM (2001) Electromagnetic Brain Mapping. IEEE Signal Process Mag 18:14–30
Barry JF et al.(2016) Optical magnetic detection of single-neuron action potentials using quantum defects in diamond. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113:14133–14138. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1601513113
Berger H (1929) Ueber das Elektrenkephalogramm des Menschen Archiv fuer Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, vol 87, pp 527–570
Borna A et al.(2017) A 20-channel magnetoencephalography system based on optically pumped magnetometers. Phys Med Biol 62:8909–8923. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aa93d1
Boto E et al.(2017) A new generation of magnetoencephalography: Room temperature measurements using optically-pumped magnetometers. NeuroImage 149:404–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.01.034
Boto E et al.(2018) Moving magnetoencephalography towards real-world applications with a wearable system. Nature 555:657–661. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature26147
Brenner D, Williamson SJ, Kaufman L (1975) Visually evoked magnetic fields of the human brain. Science 190:480–481
Canolty RT et al.(2006) High gamma power is phase-locked to theta oscillations in human neocortex. Science 313:1626–1628. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128115
Cichy RM, Pantazis D, Oliva A (2014) Resolving human object recognition in space and time. Nat Neurosci 17:455–462. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3635
Cichy RM, Pantazis D, Oliva A (2016) Similarity-Based Fusion of MEG and fMRI Reveals Spatio-Temporal Dynamics in Human Cortex During Visual Object Recognition. Cereb Cortex 26:3563–3579. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhw135
Cohen D (1968) Magnetoencephalography: evidence of magnetic fields produced by alpha-rhythm currents. Science 161:784–786
Cohen D (1972) Magnetoencephalography: detection of the brain's electrical activity with a superconducting magnetometer. Science 175:664–666
Cuffin BN, Cohen D (1977) Magnetic fields of a dipole in special volume conductor shapes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 24:372–381
Dalal SS et al.(2009) Simultaneous MEG and intracranial EEG recordings during attentive reading. NeuroImage 45:1289–1304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.017
Dale AM, Sereno MI (1993) Improved localization of cortical activity by combining EEG and MEG with MRI cortical surface reconstruction: A linear approach. J Cogn Neurosci 5:162–176
Dale AM, Liu AK, Fischl BR, Buckner RL, Belliveau JW, Lewine JD, Halgren E (2000) Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity. Neuron 26:55–67
Dannhauer M, Lanfer B, Wolters CH, Knosche TR (2011) Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis. Hum Brain Mapp 32:1383–1399. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.21114
Daunizeau J et al.(2007a) Assessing the relevance of fMRI-based prior in the EEG inverse problem: a bayesian model comparison approach. IEEE Trans Signal Process 53:3461–3472
Daunizeau J et al.(2007b) Symmetrical event-related EEG/fMRI information fusion in a variational Bayesian framework. NeuroImage 36:69–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.01.044
Drechsler F, Wolters CH, Dierkes T, Si H, Grasedyck L (2009) A full subtraction approach for finite element method based source analysis using constrained Delaunay tetrahedralisation. NeuroImage 46:1055–1065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.02.024
Faley MI, Poppe U, Borkowski RE, Schiek M, Boers F (2012) Magnetoencephalography using a Multilayer hightc DC SQUID Magnetometer. Phys Procedia 36:66–71
Goldenholz DM, Ahlfors SP, Hamalainen MS, Sharon D, Ishitobi M, Vaina LM, Stufflebeam SM (2009) Mapping the signal-to-noise-ratios of cortical sources in magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography. Hum Brain Mapp 30:1077–1086. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20571
Gramfort A, Kowalski M, Hamalainen M (2012) Mixed-norm estimates for the M/EEG inverse problem using accelerated gradient methods. Phys Med Biol 57:1937–1961. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/57/7/1937
Gramfort A, Strohmeier D, Haueisen J, Hamalainen MS, Kowalski M (2013) Time-frequency mixed-norm estimates: sparse M/EEG imaging with non-stationary source activations. NeuroImage 70:410–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.051
Graybiel AM (2000) The basal ganglia. Curr Biol CB 10:R509–R511
Grinvald A, Hildesheim R (2004) VSDI: a new era in functional imaging of cortical dynamics. Nat Rev Neurosci 5:874–885. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1536
Gullmar D, Haueisen J, Reichenbach JR (2010) Influence of anisotropic electrical conductivity in white matter tissue on the EEG/MEG forward and inverse solution. A high-resolution whole head simulation study. NeuroImage 51:145–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.02.014
Hämäläinen M, Hari R (2002) Magnetoencephalographic characterization of dynamic brain activation: basic principles and methods of data collection and source analysis. In: Toga AW, Mazziotta JC (eds) Brain Mapping, The Methods. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 227–253
Hämäläinen M, Ilmoniemi R (1984) Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates. Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo
Hämäläinen MS, Sarvas J (1987) Feasibility of the homogeneous head model in the interpretation of neuromagnetic fields. Phys Med Biol 32:91–97
Hämäläinen MS, Sarvas J (1989) Realistic conductivity geometry model of the human head for interpretation of neuromagnetic data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME 36:165–171
Hämäläinen M, Hari R, Ilmoniemi R, Knuutila J, Lounasmaa OV (1993) Magnetoencephalography – theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain. Rev Mod Phys 65:413–497
Hari R, Ilmoniemi RJ (1986) Cerebral magnetic fields. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 14:93–126
Hari R, Kaukoranta E (1985) Neuromagnetic studies of the somatosensory system. Progr Neurobiol 24:233–256
Hari R, Salmelin R (2012) Magnetoencephalography: from SQUIDs to neuroscience. Neuroimage 20th anniversary special edition. NeuroImage 61:386–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.11.074
Heilbronner SR, Platt ML (2013) Causal evidence of performance monitoring by neurons in posterior cingulate cortex during learning. Neuron 80:1384–1391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.09.028
Holmes N et al.(2018) A bi-planar coil system for nulling background magnetic fields in scalp mounted magnetoencephalography. NeuroImage 181:760–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.07.028
Horwitz B, Poeppel D (2002) How can EEG/MEG and fMRI/PET data be combined? Hum Brain Mapp 17:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.10057
Iivanainen J, Stenroos M, Parkkonen L (2017) Measuring MEG closer to the brain: Performance of on-scalp sensor arrays. NeuroImage 147:542–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.12.048
Ilmoniemi RJ, Hämäläinen MS, Knuutila J (1985) The forward and inverse problems in the spherical model. In: Weinberg H, Stroink G, Katila T (eds) Biomagnetism: Applications & Theory. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 278–282
Jas M, Larson E, Engemann DA, Leppakangas J, Taulu S, Hamalainen M, Gramfort A (2018) A Reproducible MEG/EEG Group Study With the MNE Software: Recommendations, Quality Assessments, and Good Practices. Front Neurosci 12:530. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00530
Jones EG (1998) Viewpoint: the core and matrix of thalamic organization. Neuroscience 85:331–345
Jones EG (2001) The thalamic matrix and thalamocortical synchrony. Trends Neurosci 24:595–601
Jones SR, Pritchett DL, Stufflebeam SM, Hamalainen M, Moore CI (2007) Neural correlates of tactile detection: a combined magnetoencephalography and biophysically based computational modeling study. J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci 27:10751–10764
Jones SR, Pritchett DL, Sikora MA, Stufflebeam SM, Hamalainen M, Moore CI (2009) Quantitative analysis and biophysically realistic neural modeling of the MEG mu rhythm: rhythmogenesis and modulation of sensory-evoked responses. J Neurophysiol 102:3554–3572. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00535.2009
Kakisaka Y et al.(2012) Use of simultaneous depth and MEG recording may provide complementary information regarding the epileptogenic region. Epileptic Disord 14:298–303. https://doi.org/10.1684/epd.2012.0517
Kemppainen P, Ilmoniemi RJ (1989) Channel capacity of multichannel magnetometers. In: Williamson SJ, Hoke M, Stroink G, Kotani M (eds) Advances in Biomagnetism. Plenum Press, New York, pp 635–639
Kerr CE et al.(2011) Effects of mindfulness meditation training on anticipatory alpha modulation in primary somatosensory cortex. Brain Res Bull 85:96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.03.026
Khan S et al.(2013) Local and long-range functional connectivity is reduced in concert in autism spectrum disorders. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:3107–3112. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1214533110
Kim K, Begus S, Xia H, Lee SK, Jazbinsek V, Trontelj Z, Romalis MV (2014) Multi-channel atomic magnetometer for magnetoencephalography: a configuration study. NeuroImage 89:143–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.10.040
Knuutila J et al.(1991) Design of a 122-channel neuromagnetometer covering the whole head. In: Hoke M (ed) Abstract book of the 8th international conference on biomagnetism. Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster, pp 109–110
Kominis IK, Kornack TW, Allred JC, Romalis MV (2003) A subfemtotesla multichannel atomic magnetometer. Nature 422:596–599. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01484
Kriegeskorte N, Kievit RA (2013) Representational geometry: integrating cognition, computation, and the brain. Trends Cogn Sci 17:401–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.007
Kriegeskorte N, Mur M, Bandettini P (2008) Representational similarity analysis - connecting the branches of systems neuroscience. Front Syst Neurosci 2:4. https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008
Krishnaswamy P et al.(2017) Sparsity enables estimation of both subcortical and cortical activity from MEG and EEG. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 114:E10465–E10474
Lanfer B, Wolters CH, Demokritov SO, Pantev C (2007) Validating finite element method based EEG and MEG forward computations. Paper presented at the 41 Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Biomedizinische Technik Aachen
Lew S, Wolters CH, Dierkes T, Röer C, MacLeod RS (2009) Accuracy and run-time comparison for different potential approaches and iterative solvers in finite element method based EEG source analysis. Appl Numer Math 59:1970–1988
Lew S, Sliva DD, Choe MS, Grant PE, Okada Y, Wolters CH, Hamalainen MS (2013) Effects of sutures and fontanels on MEG and EEG source analysis in a realistic infant head model. NeuroImage 76C:282–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.03.017
Liu AK, Belliveau JW, Dale AM (1998) Spatiotemporal imaging of human brain activity using functional MRI constrained magnetoencephalography data: Monte Carlo simulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:8945–8950
Lopes da Silva F, Van Rotterdam A (1992) Biophysical aspects of EEG and MEG generation. In: Niedermeyer E, Lopes da Silva F (eds) Electroencephalography: basic principles, clinical applications and related fields. W&W, Baltimore/Munich
Mosher JC, Leahy RM (1998) Recursive MUSIC: a framework for EEG and MEG source localization. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 45:1342–1354
Mosher JC, Lewis PS, Leahy RM (1992) Multiple dipole modeling and localization from spatio-temporal MEG data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 39:541–557. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.141192
Mosher JC, Leahy RM, Lewis PS (1999) EEG and MEG: forward solutions for inverse methods. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 46:245–259
Murakami S, Okada Y (2015) Invariance in current dipole moment density across brain structures and species: physiological constraint for neuroimaging. NeuroImage 111:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.003
Murakami H et al.(2016) Correlating magnetoencephalography to stereo-electroencephalography in patients undergoing epilepsy surgery. Brain J Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/aww215
Nishitani N, Avikainen S, Hari R (2004) Abnormal imitation-related cortical activation sequences in Asperger's syndrome. Ann Neurol 55:558–562. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.20031
Okada Y, Lahteenmaki A, Xu C (1999) Comparison of MEG and EEG on the basis of somatic evoked responses elicited by stimulation of the snout in the juvenile swine Clinical neurophysiology: official journal of the International Federation of Clinical. Neurophysiology 110:214–229
Okada Y et al.(2016) BabyMEG: A whole-head pediatric magnetoencephalography system for human brain development research. Rev Sci Instrum 87:094301. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4962020
Ou W, Hamalainen MS, Golland P (2009) A distributed spatio-temporal EEG/MEG inverse solver. NeuroImage 44:932–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.05.063
Ou W, Nummenmaa A, Ahveninen J, Belliveau JW, Hamalainen MS, Golland P (2010) Multimodal functional imaging using fMRI-informed regional EEG/MEG source estimation. NeuroImage 52:97–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.001
Phelps EA, LeDoux JE (2005) Contributions of the amygdala to emotion processing: from animal models to human behavior. Neuron 48:175–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2005.09.025
Plonsey R (1969) Bioelectric phenomena. McGraw-Hill, New York
Roche-Labarbe N, Aarabi A, Kongolo G, Gondry-Jouet C, Dumpelmann M, Grebe R, Wallois F (2008) High-resolution electroencephalography and source localization in neonates. Hum Brain Mapp 29:167–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20376
Sacchet MD et al.(2015) Attention drives synchronization of alpha and beta rhythms between right inferior frontal and primary sensory neocortex. J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci 35:2074–2082. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1292-14.2015
Salmelin R, Hari R (1994) Spatiotemporal characteristics of sensorimotor neuromagnetic rhythms related to thumb movement. Neuroscience 60:537–550
Salmelin R, Hari R, Lounasmaa OV, Sams M (1994) Dynamics of brain activation during picture naming. Nature 368:463–465
Sams M, Hari R (1991) Magnetoencephalography in the study of human auditory information processing. Ann N Y Acad Sci 620:102–117
Sander TH, Preusser J, Mhaskar R, Kitching J, Trahms L, Knappe S (2012) Magnetoencephalography with a chip-scale atomic magnetometer. Biomed Opt Express 3:981–990. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.3.000981
Sarvas J (1987) Basic mathematical and electromagnetic concepts of the biomagnetic inverse problem. Phys Med Biol 32:11–22
Sekihara K, Nagarajan SS (2008) Adaptive spatial filters for electromagnetic brain imaging. Springer, Berlin
Sharon D, Hamalainen MS, Tootell RB, Halgren E, Belliveau JW (2007) The advantage of combining MEG and EEG: Comparison to fMRI in focally stimulated visual cortex. NeuroImage 36:1225–1235
Sherman MA et al.(2016) Neural mechanisms of transient neocortical beta rhythms: Converging evidence from humans, computational modeling, monkeys, and mice Proceedings of the. Natl Acad Sci USA 113:E4885–E4894. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1604135113
Steinstrater O, Sillekens S, Junghoefer M, Burger M, Wolters CH (2010) Sensitivity of beamformer source analysis to deficiencies in forward modeling. Hum Brain Mapp 31:1907–1927. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20986
Stenroos M (2016) Integral equations and boundary-element solution for static potential in a general piece-wise homogeneous volume conductor. Phys Med Biol 61:N606–N617. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/22/N606
Stenroos M, Hauk O (2013) Minimum-norm cortical source estimation in layered head models is robust against skull conductivity error. NeuroImage 81:265–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.086
Stenroos M, Nummenmaa A (2016) Incorporating and Compensating Cerebrospinal Fluid in Surface-Based Forward Models of Magneto- and Electroencephalography. PLoS One 11:e0159595. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159595
Stenroos M, Hunold A, Haueisen J (2014) Comparison of three-shell and simplified volume conductor models in magnetoencephalography. NeuroImage 94:337–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.01.006
Steriade M, McCormick DA, Sejnowski TJ (1993) Thalamocortical oscillations in the sleeping and aroused brain. Science 262:679–685
Tanaka N et al.(2010) Propagation of epileptic spikes reconstructed from spatiotemporal magnetoencephalographic and electroencephalographic source analysis. NeuroImage 50:217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.033
Taylor JM et al.(2008) High-sensitivity diamond magnetometer with nanoscale resolution. Nat Phys 4:810–816. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1075
Tripp JH (1983) Physical concepts and mathematical models. In: Williamson SJ, Romani GL, Kaufman L, Modena I (eds) Biomagnetism: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Plenum, New York, pp 101–139
Tuch DS, Wedeen VJ, Dale AM, George JS, Belliveau JW (2001) Conductivity tensor mapping of the human brain using diffusion tensor. MRI Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:11697–11701
Tuomisto T, Hari R, Katila T, Poutanen T, Varpula T (1983) Studies of auditory evoked magnetic and electric responses: modality specificity and modelling. Il Nuovo Cimento 2D:471–494
Uutela K, Hämäläinen M, Somersalo E (1999) Visualization of magnetoencephalographic data using minimum current estimates. NeuroImage 10:173–180
Van Veen B, Buckley K (1988) Beamforming: A versatile approach to spatial filtering IEEE assp magazine
Vesanen PT et al.(2013) Hybrid ultra-low-field MRI and magnetoencephalography system based on a commercial whole-head neuromagnetometer. Magn Reson Med 69:1795–1804. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.24413
Wan Q, Kerr C, Pritchett D, Hamalainen M, Moore C, Jones S (2011) Dynamics of dynamics within a single data acquisition session: variation in neocortical alpha oscillations in human MEG. PLoS One 6:e24941. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024941
Wang C, Sun L, Lichtenwalter B, Zerkle B, Okada Y (2016) Compact, ultra-low vibration, closed-cycle helium recycler for uninterrupted operation of MEG with SQUID magnetometers. Cryogenics 76:16–22
Williamson SJ, Kaufman L (1981) Biomagnetism. J Magn Magn Mat 22:129–202
Wolters CH, Anwander A, Berti G, Hartmann U (2007a) Geometry-adapted hexahedral meshes improve accuracy of finite-element-method-based EEG source analysis. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 54:1446–1453. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2007.890736
Wolters CH, Köstler H, Möller C, Härdtlein J, Anwander A (2007b) Numerical approaches for dipole modeling in finite element method based source analysis. Int Congr Ser 1300:189–192. Elsevier
Wolters CH, Köstler H, Möller C, Härtlein J, Grasedyck L, Hackbusch W (2007c) Numerical mathematics of the subtraction method for the modeling of a current dipole in EEG source reconstruction using finite element head models. SIAM J Sci Comput 30:24–45
Xie M et al.(2017) Benchmarking for On-Scalp MEG Sensors. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 64:1270–1276. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2016.2599177
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hämäläinen, M.S., Lundqvist, D. (2019). MEG as an Enabling Tool in Neuroscience: Transcending Boundaries with New Analysis Methods and Devices. In: Supek, S., Aine, C. (eds) Magnetoencephalography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62657-4_81-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62657-4_81-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62657-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62657-4
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EngineeringReference Module Computer Science and Engineering