Forward--Inverse Interplay in FEM-Based EEG Source Imaging: Distributional Signatures of Advanced Source Models and Inverse Solvers

TL;DR

This study investigates how different source models and inverse methods in EEG source imaging interact, revealing that their compatibility significantly affects localization accuracy and distributional signatures.

Contribution

It introduces a comprehensive analysis of the interplay between advanced source models and inverse solvers using realistic head models and quantitative distributional measures.

Findings

Different source models produce distinct distributional signatures in reconstructed activity.

The success of inverse methods depends strongly on the source model used.

Quantitative measures like Earth Mover's Distance reveal the dependence between source models and inverse methods.

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) source imaging aims to infer brain activity from electrical potentials measured on the scalp. This is a difficult problem because many different source patterns can explain the same measurements. The result depends strongly on two things: the forward model and the inverse method. In this work, we study how these two parts work together. We focus not only on where the activity is located, but also on how the reconstructed activity is distributed in space. We suggest that different source models create different signatures in the reconstructed activity. We use realistic head models and compute forward solutions with the finite element method using Zeffiro Interface and DUNEuro. We test different source models, including 2 implementations of a divergence-conforming model, and one implementation of Local subtraction approach. For inverse methods, we use advanced methods such as standardized hierarchical adaptive L1 regression (SHAL1R), standardized Kalman filtering (SKF), and classical dipole scanning. To understand the complex interplay between the forward and inverse approaches, we analyze the inverse source localization results using distributional quantitative measures, including Earth Mover's Distance and depth bias scatter plot, and qualitatively assess the amplitude distribution and focality. The results show that there is a strong dependence between the choice of source model and the success rate of a given inverse method: a source model that corresponds well with a single point-like source is a good match with an inverse method that presupposes such a source.