[FieldTrip] BEMCP

RICHARDS, JOHN RICHARDS at mailbox.sc.edu
Sat Mar 12 15:42:59 CET 2016


I have had problems with BEMCP.

 1—one of the practical / technical problems is that if the compartments overlap, or even come close, then the procedure would not work—the ft_sourceanlaysis crashed.

 2—There are a couple of studies comparing BEMCP and dipoli, among other methods.  The BEMCP method does not fare well, the dipoli fares better,

E. g., among three or four studies I have seen.
Gramfort, A., et al. (2010). "OpenMEEG: opensource software for quasistatic bioelectromagnetics." Biomed Eng Online 9: 45.

Gramfort, A., et al. (2011). "Forward field computation with OpenMEEG." Comput Intell Neurosci 2011: 923703.

3—I have directly compared BEMCP, a 4-shell concentric spheres, dipoli, and the Simbio FEM model, by correlating results from each model (e.g., correlations of all the dipole CDR estimates; or correlations across anatomical ROIs).  The BEMCP and concentric spheres work similarly, and the dipoli and Simbio-FEM work similarly.   This was with infants using participant-computed realistic models for the compartments and the FEM.

I am not claiming from this and superiority of the dipoli (or FEM) models over the BEMCP, but I suggest looking at the research literature formally comparing these methods before going much further with BEMCP.


John E. Richards Carolina Distinguished Professor
Department of Psychology
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC  29208
Dept Phone: 803 777 2079
Fax: 803 777 9558
Email: richards-john at sc.edu<mailto:richards-john at sc.edu>
HTTP: jerlab.psych.sc.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20160312/e9e89dab/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the fieldtrip mailing list