<div>Beth, you ask about going to source space. </div>
<div>It's my understanding that people don't yet know how to reliably go from sensor space to source space. The problem is that neighboring cortical areas are often wired together and will fire together and since these neighboring areas will likely have different folding patterns and different time functions the inverse problem of going to sources has problems with both EEG and MEG because of how close these neighbors are to each other. There are two cases where there seem to be solutions, one is occipital cortex where V1, V2, V3, V3a have retinotopic organization that can be identified with fMRI/MRI. The idea here is that with tiny patches in a dartboard layout one can overwhelm the above ambiguity by making use of the topographic layout of cortex. Another area is in somatosensory and motor areas where the homunculus mapping also allows neighboring areas to be separated. Luckily fMRI can also identifying other regions that could be used in helping one go from sensors to sources. However, the above manipulations aren't easily carried out. In addition, there are many researchers who believe that ICA can help do the job. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>In summary it is healthy to be skeptical of some of the claims of success in going from sensors to sources. </div>
<div>Stan<br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Belluscio, Beth (NIH/NINDS) [E] <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:BelluscB@ninds.nih.gov">BelluscB@ninds.nih.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div lang="EN-US" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I want to calculate the strength of the evoked fields in response to a series of stimuli. Initially, I tried doing this with the averaged data at sensors demonstrating an evoked field following the stimulus. However, I noticed that during the course of the response, the dipole of the source seemed to shift slightly, and that this dipole was not consistently oriented following successive stimuli. So I was concerned that by measuring only the response at the sensor, I would obtain a false sense of change in the underlying response. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> I decided to try looking at the response with the data converted into the corresponding planar gradient (I use a CTF MEG). However, I was unable to find a way to obtain values of the field within an ROI with this data set. Does anyone know how to do this?</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> Lastly, it seems it might be best to compute the source and then evaluate the strength of the signal from an ROI in source-space. What are the pros/cons of using sensor space vs. source space to measure the amplitude of a response? Is there a convention within the field for the methodology for doing this?</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Arial" size="2"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Beth Belluscio, MD-PhD</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Clinical Fellow</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Human Motor Control Section</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">301-402-3495</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> </span></font></p></div></div>
<p>----------------------------------</p>
<p>The aim of this list is to facilitate the discussion between users of the FieldTrip toolbox, to share experiences and to discuss new ideas for MEG and EEG analysis.</p>
<p><a href="http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/fieldtrip.html" target="_blank">http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/fieldtrip.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.ru.nl/fcdonders/fieldtrip/" target="_blank">http://www.ru.nl/fcdonders/fieldtrip/</a></p></blockquote></div><br>
<p>----------------------------------</p>
<p>The aim of this list is to facilitate the discussion between users of the FieldTrip toolbox, to share experiences and to discuss new ideas for MEG and EEG analysis.</p>
<p> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/fieldtrip.html</p>
<p> http://www.ru.nl/fcdonders/fieldtrip/</p>