[FieldTrip] Source reconstruction - low-rank leadfield

[Schoffelen, J.M. (Jan Mathijs)]

Hi Tibor, and Jefe,


I guess that the road to a solution starts by looking into the code, and inspecting what line prompts the error (let me give this one away: line 145 in ft_inverse_eloreta).

Also, it might be useful to consider not only the source model, but also the volume conduction model, and the method that was used for the forward computation. This was not mentioned in your messages, so it is hard to comment on that.

Then, it may make sense to think about what matrix gives a rank of 0. Typically, the only way in which matlab returns a 0, is in the case of an empty matrix.

Thus, the suspicion will rise that the eloreta code is trying to operate on dipole positions for which the corresponding leadfield is an empty matrix.

The latter typically occurs if that dipole position is considered to be an ‘outside’ position in the forward computation step, e.g. when it is ’sticking out’ of the brain compartment boundary of the volume conduction model (but again, given the lack of details about the specifics of the volume conduction model etc., this is mere speculation, causing me to already type and think about this for longer than is probably necessary (in case the above is not true) ).

Then, the overall question might boil down to the question: why does the forward computation consider some dipoles to be outside (i.e. not returning a leadfield matrix for those locations), and why does the inverse computation code (at least for particular method) not take that into account?

Assuming that all my speculations above are valid, a principled solution will lie in ensuring that the eloreta code only considers the dipole positions with a valid lead field matrix.

I am looking forward for a PR that addresses this.


Best wishes,

Jan-Mathijs


On 20 Oct 2020, at 10:26, Diego Lozano-Soldevilla <dlozanosoldevilla at gmail.com<mailto:dlozanosoldevilla at gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear Tibor and FieldTrippers
I'm in the same situation. I excluded those positions but now I'm wondering whether this was a good decision. If somebody know what's happening and how to fix this, please drop a line!
Yours sincerely,
Diego



On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:17, <tibor.auer at gmail.com<mailto:tibor.auer at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear FieldTrippers,

I have some questions regarding source reconstruction.

We use eLORETA, which runs fine for most participants, however, I receive this error message for quite a few:

the forward solutions have a different rank for each location, which is not supported

The rank of the leadfdield is reduced at each sourcemodel position to the default 3. However, it sometimes has an even lower rank (often 0) at certain sourcemodel positions, and I am not sure how to interpret it. We use a cortical sheet based sourcemodel, and I have noticed that only a handful (<<1%) of positions are affected. My educated guess would be to exclude those positions, but I am not sure how it affects the analysis, either.

Kind regards,
Tibor

Auer, Tibor M.D. Ph.D.
Research Fellow
School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences
University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH
T.Auer at surrey.ac.uk<mailto:T.Auer at surrey.ac.uk>
@TiborAuer<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FTiborAuer&data=02%7C01%7Ct.auer%40surrey.ac.uk%7Cdb32da458c424eedef2908d7d4bd1421%7C6b902693107440aa9e21d89446a2ebb5%7C0%7C0%7C637211780868086968&sdata=zrT5%2FnGGsar14C3WartuU99tzsfLu30Peh9fuaqrAUg%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
fieldtrip mailing list
https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002202
_______________________________________________
fieldtrip mailing list
https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002202

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20201020/0c4f5f9c/attachment.htm>