Evaluation of multiple-sphere head models for MEG source localization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetoencephalography (MEG) source analysis has largely relied on spherical conductor models of the head to simplify forward calculations of the brain's magnetic field. Multiple- (or overlapping, local) sphere models, where an optimal sphere is selected for each sensor, are considered an improvement over single-sphere models and are computationally simpler than realistic models. However, there is limited information available regarding the different methods used to generate these models and their relative accuracy. We describe a variety of single- and multiple-sphere fitting approaches, including a novel method that attempts to minimize the field error. An accurate boundary element method simulation was used to evaluate the relative field measurement error (12% on average) and dipole fit localization bias (3.5 mm) of each model over the entire brain. All spherical models can contribute in the order of 1 cm to the localization bias in regions of the head that depart significantly from a sphere (inferior frontal and temporal). These spherical approximation errors can give rise to larger localization differences when all modeling effects are taken into account and with more complex source configurations or other inverse techniques, as shown with a beamformer example. Results differed noticeably depending on the source location, making it difficult to recommend a fitting method that performs best in general. Given these limitations, it may be advisable to expand the use of realistic head models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".