Capturing the Forest But Missing the Trees: Microstates Inadequate for Characterizing Shorter-Scale EEG Dynamics.
Clicks: 328
ID: 46647
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
74.9
/100
328 views
197 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #8 of 10 articles by views in neural computation
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The brain is known to be active even when not performing any overt cognitive tasks, and often it engages in involuntary mind wandering. This resting state has been extensively characterized in terms of fMRI-derived brain networks. However, an alternate method has recently gained popularity: EEG microstate analysis. Proponents of microstates postulate that the brain discontinuously switches between four quasi-stable states defined by specific EEG scalp topologies at peaks in the global field potential (GFP). These microstates are thought to be "atoms of thought," involved with visual, auditory, salience, and attention processing. However, this method makes some major assumptions by excluding EEG data outside the GFP peaks and then clustering the EEG scalp topologies at the GFP peaks, assuming that only one microstate is active at any given time. This study explores the evidence surrounding these assumptions by studying the temporal dynamics of microstates and its clustering space using tools from dynamical systems analysis, fractal, and chaos theory to highlight the shortcomings in microstate analysis. The results show evidence of complex and chaotic EEG dynamics outside the GFP peaks, which is being missed by microstate analysis. Furthermore, the winner-takes-all approach of only one microstate being active at a time is found to be inadequate since the dynamic EEG scalp topology does not always resemble that of the assigned microstate, and there is competition among the different microstate classes. Finally, clustering space analysis shows that the four microstates do not cluster into four distinct and separable clusters. Taken collectively, these results show that the discontinuous description of EEG microstates is inadequate when looking at nonstationary short-scale EEG dynamics.
| Reference Key |
shaw2019capturingneural
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Shaw, Saurabh Bhaskar;Dhindsa, Kiret;Reilly, James P;Becker, Suzanna; |
| Journal | neural computation |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1162/neco_a_01229
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.