Brain activity mapping from MEG data via a hierarchical Bayesian algorithm with automatic depth weighting: sensitivity and specificity analysis
This work provides a rigorous, unbiased evaluation framework for MEG inverse solvers, which is important for researchers and clinicians using MEG for brain activity mapping.
The paper proposes novel statistical protocols to quantify the sensitivity and specificity of MEG inverse solvers, and uses them to evaluate the IAS algorithm against wMNE, dSPM, and sLORETA. The results show that IAS performs well for both cortical and subcortical activity estimation.
A recently proposed IAS MEG inverse solver algorithm, based on the coupling of a hierarchical Bayesian model with computationally efficient Krylov subspace linear solver, has been shown to perform well for both superficial and deep brain sources. However, a systematic study of its sensitivity and specificity as a function of the activity location is still missing. We propose novel statistical protocols to quantify the performance of MEG inverse solvers, focusing in particular on their sensitivity and specificity in identifying active brain regions. We use these protocols for a systematic study of the sensitivity and specificity of the IAS MEG inverse solver, comparing the performance with three standard inversion methods, wMNE, dSPM, and sLORETA. To avoid the bias of anecdotal tests towards a particular algorithm, the proposed protocols are Monte Carlo sampling based, generating an ensemble of activity patches in each brain region identified in a given atlas. The sensitivity is measured by how much, on average, the reconstructed activity is concentrated in the brain region of the simulated active patch. The specificity analysis is based on Bayes factors, interpreting the estimated current activity as data for testing the hypothesis that the active brain region is correctly identified, vs. the hypothesis of any erroneous attribution. The methodology allows the presence of a single or several simultaneous activity regions, without assuming the knowledge of the number of active regions. The testing protocols suggest that the IAS solver performs well in terms of sensitivity and specificity both with cortical and subcortical activity estimation.