Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byZain Gros Modified over 2 years ago

1
MEG/EEG Inverse problem and solutions In a Bayesian Framework EEG/MEG SPM course, Bruxelles, 2011 Jérémie Mattout Lyon Neuroscience Research Centre ? ? With many thanks to Karl Friston, Christophe Phillips, Rik Henson, Jean Daunizeau

2
Talk’s Overview SPM rationale -generative models -probabilistic framework -Twofold inference: parameters & models EEG/MEG inverse problem and SPM solution(s) -probabilistic generative models -Parameter inference and model comparison

3
Model: "measure, standard" ; representation or object that enables to describe the functionning of a physical system or concept A model enables you to: - Simulate data - Estimate (non-observables) parameters - Predict future observations - Test hypothesis / Compare models Stimulations Physiological Observations Behavioural Observations A word about generative models

4
Model: "measure, standard" ; representation or object that enables to describe the functionning of a physical system or concept A model enables you to: - Simulate data - Estimate (non-observables) parameters - Predict future observations - Test hypothesis / Compare models MEG Observations (Y) Auditory-Visual Stimulations (u) Sources/Network ( ) Y = f( ,u) Model m: f, , u A word about generative models

5
Probabilistic / Bayesian framework Probability of an event: - represented by real numbers - conforms to intuition - is consistent a=2 b=5 a=2 normalization: marginalization: conditioning : (Bayes rule)

6
Probabilistic modelling MEG Observations (Y) Auditory-Visual Stimulations (u) Sources/Network ( ) Y = f( ,u) Model m: f, , u Probabilistic modelling enables: - To formalize mathematically our knowledge in a model m - To account for uncertainty - To make inference on both model parameters and models themselves Prior Likelihood Marginal or Evidence Posterior

7
A toy example MEG Observations (Y) Y = L + ɛ Model m: - One dipolar source with known position and orientation. - Amplitude ? Source gain vector Source amplitude Measurment noise Linear f Gaussian distributions Likelihood Prior

8
A toy example MEG Observations (Y) Model m: Bayes rule Posterior

9
Occam’s razor or principle of parsimony Hypothesis testing: model comparison Evidence « complexity should not be assumed without necessity » model evidence p(y|m) space of all data sets y=f(x) x

10
Bayesian factor space of all datasets define the null and the alternative hypothesis H (or model m) in terms of priors, e.g.: ifthen reject H0 invert both generative models (obtain both model evidences) apply decision rule, i.e.: Hypothesis testing: model comparison

11
Probabilistic framing EEG/MEG inverse problem forward computation Likelihood & Prior inverse computation Posterior & Evidence

12
Distributed/Imaging model EEG/MEG inverse problem Likelihood Parameters : (J, ) Hypothesis m: distributed (linear) model, gain matrix L, gaussian distributions Prior Sensor level # sources IID (Minimum Norm) Maximum Smoothness (LORETA-like) Source level # sensors

13
Incorporating Multiple Constraints EEG/MEG inverse problem Likelihood Paramètres : (J, , ) Hypothèses m: hierarchical model, operator L + components C Prior Source (or sensor) level Multiple Sparse Priors (MSP) …

14
Expectation Maximization (EM) / Restricted Maximum Likelihood (ReML) / Free-Energy optimization / Parametric Empirical Bayes (PEB) Estimation procedure M-step E-step accuracy complexity Iterative scheme

15
Model comparison based on the Free-energy Estimation procedure model M i FiFi 1 2 3 At convergence

16
At the end of the day Somesthesic data

17
- Pharmacoresistive Epilepsy (surgery planning): symptoms PET + sIRM SEEG Could MEG replace or at least complement and guide SEEG ? Romain Bouet Julien Jung François Maugière Seizure 120 patients : MEG proved very much informative in 85 patients 30s Example MEG - Epilepsy

18
Patient 1 : model comparison MEG (best model) SEEG Example Romain Bouet Julien Jung François Maugière MEG - Epilepsy

19
Patient 2 : estimated dynamics temps SEEG lésion occipitale Romain Bouet Julien Jung François Maugière Example MEG - Epilepsy

20
Conclusion The SPM probabilistic inverse modelling approach enables to: Estimate both parameters and hyperparameters from the data Incorporate multiple priors of different nature Estimate a full posterior distribution over model parameters Estimate an approximation to the log-evidence (the free-energy) which enables model comparison based on the same data Encompass multimodal fusion and group analysis gracefully Note that SPM also include a flexible and convenient meshing tool, as well as beamforming solutions and a Bayesian ECD approach…

21
Thank you for your attention

22
Graphical representation EEG/MEG inverse problem Fixed Variable Data

23
Fusion of different modality

24
Incorporating fMRI priors

25
Hypothesis testing: inference on parameters Frequentist vs. Bayesian approach ifthen reject H0 estimate parameters (obtain test stat.) define the null, e.g.: apply decision rule, i.e.: classical inference (SPM) ifthen accept H0 invert model (obtain posterior pdf) define the null, e.g.: apply decision rule, i.e.: Bayesian inference (PPM)

Similar presentations

OK

Group analyses of fMRI data Methods & models for fMRI data analysis November 2012 With many thanks for slides & images to: FIL Methods group, particularly.

Group analyses of fMRI data Methods & models for fMRI data analysis November 2012 With many thanks for slides & images to: FIL Methods group, particularly.

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on arunachal pradesh culture Ppt on marie curie's husband Ppt on classical economics and unemployment Java ppt on inheritance Ppt on boilers operations manual Ppt on 2 dimensional figures and 3 dimensional slideshow Ppt on political parties and electoral process of the philippines Ppt on switching characteristics of devices Ppt online shopping project documentation Ppt on as 14 amalgamation and capital