Neural Connectivity with Hidden Gaussian Graphical State-Model

The noninvasive procedures for neural connectivity are under questioning. Theoretical models sustain that the electromagnetic field registered at external sensors is elicited by currents at neural space. Nevertheless, what we observe at the sensor space is a superposition of projected fields, from the whole gray-matter. This is the reason for a major pitfall of noninvasive Electrophysiology methods: distorted reconstruction of neural activity and its connectivity or leakage. It has been proven that current methods produce incorrect connectomes. Somewhat related to the incorrect connectivity modelling, they disregard either Systems Theory and Bayesian Information Theory. We introduce a new formalism that attains for it, Hidden Gaussian Graphical State-Model (HIGGS). A neural Gaussian Graphical Model (GGM) hidden by the observation equation of Magneto-encephalographic (MEEG) signals. HIGGS is equivalent to a frequency domain Linear State Space Model (LSSM) but with sparse connectivity prior. The mathematical contribution here is the theory for high-dimensional and frequency-domain HIGGS solvers. We demonstrate that HIGGS can attenuate the leakage effect in the most critical case: the distortion EEG signal due to head volume conduction heterogeneities. Its application in EEG is illustrated with retrieved connectivity patterns from human Steady State Visual Evoked Potentials (SSVEP). We provide for the first time confirmatory evidence for noninvasive procedures of neural connectivity: concurrent EEG and Electrocorticography (ECoG) recordings on monkey. Open source packages are freely available online, to reproduce the results presented in this paper and to analyze external MEEG databases

Correspondence: Are Cognitive Functions Localizable? Colin Camerer et al. versus Marieke van Rooij and John G. Holden

The Fall 2011 issue of this journal published a two-paper section on “Neuroeconomics.” One paper, by Ernst Fehr and Antonio Rangel, clearly and concisely summarized a small part of the fast-growing literature. The second paper, “It’s about Space, It’s about Time, Neuroeconomics, and the Brain Sublime,” by Marieke van Rooij and Guy Van Orden, is beautifully written and enjoyable to read, but misleading in many critical ways. A number of economists and neuroscientists working at the intersection of the two fields shared our reaction and have signed this letter, as shown below. Some of the paper’s descriptions of empirical findings and methods in neuroeconomics are incomplete, badly out of date, or flatly wrong. In studies the authors describe in detail, their skeptical interpretations have often been refuted by published data, old and new, that they overlook

Attentional Enhancement of Auditory Mismatch Responses: a DCM/MEG Study.

Despite similar behavioral effects, attention and expectation influence evoked responses differently: Attention typically enhances event-related responses, whereas expectation reduces them. This dissociation has been reconciled under predictive coding, where prediction errors are weighted by precision associated with attentional modulation. Here, we tested the predictive coding account of attention and expectation using magnetoencephalography and modeling. Temporal attention and sensory expectation were orthogonally manipulated in an auditory mismatch paradigm, revealing opposing effects on evoked response amplitude. Mismatch negativity (MMN) was enhanced by attention, speaking against its supposedly pre-attentive nature. This interaction effect was modeled in a canonical microcircuit using dynamic causal modeling, comparing models with modulation of extrinsic and intrinsic connectivity at different levels of the auditory hierarchy. While MMN was explained by recursive interplay of sensory predictions and prediction errors, attention was linked to the gain of inhibitory interneurons, consistent with its modulation of sensory precision

Bayesian multi-modal model comparison: a case study on the generators of the spike and the wave in generalized spike–wave complexes

We present a novel approach to assess the networks involved in the generation of spontaneous pathological brain activity based on multi-modal imaging data. We propose to use probabilistic fMRI-constrained EEG source reconstruction as a complement to EEG-correlated fMRI analysis to disambiguate between networks that co-occur at the fMRI time resolution. The method is based on Bayesian model comparison, where the different models correspond to different combinations of fMRI-activated (or deactivated) cortical clusters. By computing the model evidence (or marginal likelihood) of each and every candidate source space partition, we can infer the most probable set of fMRI regions that has generated a given EEG scalp data window. We illustrate the method using EEG-correlated fMRI data acquired in a patient with ictal generalized spike–wave (GSW) discharges, to examine whether different networks are involved in the generation of the spike and the wave components, respectively. To this effect, we compared a family of 128 EEG source models, based on the combinations of seven regions haemodynamically involved (deactivated) during a prolonged ictal GSW discharge, namely: bilateral precuneus, bilateral medial frontal gyrus, bilateral middle temporal gyrus, and right cuneus. Bayesian model comparison has revealed the most likely model associated with the spike component to consist of a prefrontal region and bilateral temporal–parietal regions and the most likely model associated with the wave component to comprise the same temporal–parietal regions only. The result supports the hypothesis of different neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the generation of the spike versus wave components of GSW discharges