Comparison of EEG source localization using simplified and anatomically accurate head models in younger and older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accuracy of electroencephalography (EEG) source localization relies on the volume conduction head model. A previous analysis of young adults has shown that simplified head models have larger source localization errors when compared with head models based on magnetic resonance images (MRIs). As obtaining individual MRIs may not always be feasible, researchers often use generic head models based on template MRIs. It is unclear how much error would be introduced using template MRI head models in older adults that likely have differences in brain structure compared to young adults. The primary goal of this study was to determine the error caused by using simplified head models without individual-specific MRIs in both younger and older adults. We collected high-density EEG during uneven terrain walking and motor imagery for 15 younger (22±3 years) and 21 older adults (74±5 years) and obtained T1-weighted MRI for each individual. We performed equivalent dipole fitting after independent component analysis to obtain brain source locations using four forward modeling pipelines with increasing complexity. These pipelines included: 1) a generic head model with template electrode positions or 2) digitized electrode positions, 3) individual-specific head models with digitized electrode positions using simplified tissue segmentation, or 4) anatomically accurate segmentation. We found that when compared to the anatomically accurate individual-specific head models, performing dipole fitting with generic head models led to similar source localization discrepancies (up to 2 cm) for younger and older adults. Co-registering digitized electrode locations to the generic head models reduced source localization discrepancies by ~6 mm. Additionally, we found that source depths generally increased with skull conductivity for the representative young adult but not as much for the older adult. Our results can help inform a more accurate interpretation of brain areas in EEG studies when individual MRIs are unavailable.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".