Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM) in EEG and MEG source analysis Carsten Wolters Institut für Biomagnetismus und Biosignalanalyse, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
J. Daunizeau Institute of Empirical Research in Economics, Zurich, Switzerland Brain and Spine Institute, Paris, France Bayesian inference.
Advertisements

Bayesian inference Lee Harrison York Neuroimaging Centre 01 / 05 / 2009.
Probabilistic models Jouni Tuomisto THL. Outline Deterministic models with probabilistic parameters Hierarchical Bayesian models Bayesian belief nets.
CHAPTER 8 More About Estimation. 8.1 Bayesian Estimation In this chapter we introduce the concepts related to estimation and begin this by considering.
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition LECTURE 05: MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION Objectives: Discrete Features Maximum Likelihood Resources: D.H.S: Chapter 3 (Part.
Psychology 290 Special Topics Study Course: Advanced Meta-analysis April 7, 2014.
Bayesian Estimation in MARK
1 12. Principles of Parameter Estimation The purpose of this lecture is to illustrate the usefulness of the various concepts introduced and studied in.
MEG/EEG Inverse problem and solutions In a Bayesian Framework EEG/MEG SPM course, Bruxelles, 2011 Jérémie Mattout Lyon Neuroscience Research Centre ? ?
The M/EEG inverse problem
CHAPTER 16 MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO
Smoothing 3D Meshes using Markov Random Fields
Jun Zhu Dept. of Comp. Sci. & Tech., Tsinghua University This work was done when I was a visiting researcher at CMU. Joint.
Bayesian statistics – MCMC techniques
Visual Recognition Tutorial
Econometrics & Business The University of Sydney Michael Smith Econometrics & Business Statistics, U. of Sydney Ludwig Fahrmeir Department.
Parameter Estimation: Maximum Likelihood Estimation Chapter 3 (Duda et al.) – Sections CS479/679 Pattern Recognition Dr. George Bebis.
AGC DSP AGC DSP Professor A G Constantinides© Estimation Theory We seek to determine from a set of data, a set of parameters such that their values would.
J. Daunizeau Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London, UK Institute of Empirical Research in Economics, Zurich, Switzerland Bayesian inference.
. PGM: Tirgul 10 Parameter Learning and Priors. 2 Why learning? Knowledge acquisition bottleneck u Knowledge acquisition is an expensive process u Often.
End of Chapter 8 Neil Weisenfeld March 28, 2005.
Visual Recognition Tutorial
Arizona State University DMML Kernel Methods – Gaussian Processes Presented by Shankar Bhargav.
Computer vision: models, learning and inference Chapter 10 Graphical Models.
Computer vision: models, learning and inference
Image Analysis and Markov Random Fields (MRFs) Quanren Xiong.
Binary Variables (1) Coin flipping: heads=1, tails=0 Bernoulli Distribution.
Bayes Factor Based on Han and Carlin (2001, JASA).
Modeling Menstrual Cycle Length in Pre- and Peri-Menopausal Women Michael Elliott Xiaobi Huang Sioban Harlow University of Michigan School of Public Health.
The horseshoe estimator for sparse signals CARLOS M. CARVALHO NICHOLAS G. POLSON JAMES G. SCOTT Biometrika (2010) Presented by Eric Wang 10/14/2010.
Bayesian parameter estimation in cosmology with Population Monte Carlo By Darell Moodley (UKZN) Supervisor: Prof. K Moodley (UKZN) SKA Postgraduate conference,
DTU Medical Visionday May 27, 2009 Generative models for automated brain MRI segmentation Koen Van Leemput Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical.
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition ECE 8423 – Adaptive Signal Processing Objectives: Deterministic vs. Random Maximum A Posteriori Maximum Likelihood Minimum.
Finding Scientific topics August , Topic Modeling 1.A document as a probabilistic mixture of topics. 2.A topic as a probability distribution.
Bayesian Inversion of Stokes Profiles A.Asensio Ramos (IAC) M. J. Martínez González (LERMA) J. A. Rubiño Martín (IAC) Beaulieu Workshop ( Beaulieu sur.
EEG/MEG Source Localisation SPM Course – Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging – Oct ? ? Jérémie Mattout, Christophe Phillips Jean Daunizeau Guillaume.
Mixture Models, Monte Carlo, Bayesian Updating and Dynamic Models Mike West Computing Science and Statistics, Vol. 24, pp , 1993.
EEG/MEG source reconstruction
ECE 8443 – Pattern Recognition ECE 8423 – Adaptive Signal Processing Objectives: Conjugate Priors Multinomial Gaussian MAP Variance Estimation Example.
Fast Simulators for Assessment and Propagation of Model Uncertainty* Jim Berger, M.J. Bayarri, German Molina June 20, 2001 SAMO 2001, Madrid *Project of.
Tracking Multiple Cells By Correspondence Resolution In A Sequential Bayesian Framework Nilanjan Ray Gang Dong Scott T. Acton C.L. Brown Department of.
The famous “sprinkler” example (J. Pearl, Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems, 1988)
1 Analytic Solution of Hierarchical Variational Bayes Approach in Linear Inverse Problem Shinichi Nakajima, Sumio Watanabe Nikon Corporation Tokyo Institute.
MCMC (Part II) By Marc Sobel. Monte Carlo Exploration  Suppose we want to optimize a complicated distribution f(*). We assume ‘f’ is known up to a multiplicative.
EEG/MEG source reconstruction
A shared random effects transition model for longitudinal count data with informative missingness Jinhui Li Joint work with Yingnian Wu, Xiaowei Yang.
1 Chapter 8: Model Inference and Averaging Presented by Hui Fang.
Introduction to Sampling Methods Qi Zhao Oct.27,2004.
The Unscented Particle Filter 2000/09/29 이 시은. Introduction Filtering –estimate the states(parameters or hidden variable) as a set of observations becomes.
CS Statistical Machine learning Lecture 25 Yuan (Alan) Qi Purdue CS Nov
Dynamic Causal Model for evoked responses in MEG/EEG Rosalyn Moran.
Regularization of energy-based representations Minimize total energy E p (u) + (1- )E d (u,d) E p (u) : Stabilizing function - a smoothness constraint.
Bayesian inference Lee Harrison York Neuroimaging Centre 23 / 10 / 2009.
Density Estimation in R Ha Le and Nikolaos Sarafianos COSC 7362 – Advanced Machine Learning Professor: Dr. Christoph F. Eick 1.
Ch 1. Introduction Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, C. M. Bishop, Updated by J.-H. Eom (2 nd round revision) Summarized by K.-I.
Generalization Performance of Exchange Monte Carlo Method for Normal Mixture Models Kenji Nagata, Sumio Watanabe Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Markov Chain Monte Carlo in R
CS479/679 Pattern Recognition Dr. George Bebis
Ch3: Model Building through Regression
Rey R. Ramirez & Sylvain Baillet Neurospeed Laboratory, MEG Program,
CAP 5636 – Advanced Artificial Intelligence
Filtering and State Estimation: Basic Concepts
Dynamic Causal Model for evoked responses in M/EEG Rosalyn Moran.
Where did we stop? The Bayes decision rule guarantees an optimal classification… … But it requires the knowledge of P(ci|x) (or p(x|ci) and P(ci)) We.
Bayesian inference J. Daunizeau
M/EEG Statistical Analysis & Source Localization
Wellcome Centre for Neuroimaging, UCL, UK.
Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning Chapter 2: Probability Distributions July chonbuk national university.
Markov Networks.
Yalchin Efendiev Texas A&M University
Presentation transcript:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM) in EEG and MEG source analysis Carsten Wolters Institut für Biomagnetismus und Biosignalanalyse, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster Vorlesung, 6.Mai 2014

[Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, NeuroImage, 2012] [Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, Biomag2012, 2012] [Lucka, Diploma thesis in Mathematics, March 2011]

[Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, NeuroImage, 2012] [Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, Biomag2012, 2012] [Lucka, Diploma thesis in Mathematics, March 2011]

[Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, NeuroImage, 2012]

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: The likelihood model Central to Bayesian approach: Accounting for each uncertainty concerning the value of a variable explicitly: The variable is modeled as a random variable Central to Bayesian approach: Accounting for each uncertainty concerning the value of a variable explicitly: The variable is modeled as a random variable In this study, we model the additive measurement noise by a Gaussian random variable In this study, we model the additive measurement noise by a Gaussian random variable For EEG/MEG, this leads to the following likelihood model: For EEG/MEG, this leads to the following likelihood model:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: The likelihood model [Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, NeuroImage, in revision] [Lucka, Burger, Pursiainen & Wolters, Biomed.Eng., 2011] [Lucka, Diploma thesis in Mathematics, March 2011] The conditional probability density of B given S is called likelihood density, in our (Gaussian) case, it is thus: The conditional probability density of B given S is called likelihood density, in our (Gaussian) case, it is thus:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Prior and Bayes rule Due to the ill-posedness, inference about S given B is not feasible like that, we need to encode a-priori information about S in its density p pr (s), which is called prior Due to the ill-posedness, inference about S given B is not feasible like that, we need to encode a-priori information about S in its density p pr (s), which is called prior We call the conditional density of S given B the posterior: p post (s|b) We call the conditional density of S given B the posterior: p post (s|b) Then, the model can be inverted via Bayes rule:Then, the model can be inverted via Bayes rule: The term p(b) is called model evidence, (see ). Here, it is just a normalizing constant and not important for the inference presented now The term p(b) is called model evidence, (see Sato et al., 2004; Trujillo-Barreto et al., 2004; Henson et al., 2009, 2010 ). Here, it is just a normalizing constant and not important for the inference presented now

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: MAP and CM The common way to exploit the information contained in the posterior is to infer a point-estimate for the value of S out of it The common way to exploit the information contained in the posterior is to infer a point-estimate for the value of S out of it There are two popular choices, the Maximum A-Posteriori (MAP, the highest mode of the posterior) and the Conditional Mean (CM, the expected value of the posterior): There are two popular choices, the Maximum A-Posteriori (MAP, the highest mode of the posterior) and the Conditional Mean (CM, the expected value of the posterior): Practically, the MAP is a high-dimensional optimization problem and the CM is a high-dimensional integration problem Practically, the MAP is a high-dimensional optimization problem and the CM is a high-dimensional integration problem

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Specific priors used in EEG/MEG To revisit some commonly known inverse methods, we consider Gibbs distribution as prior: To revisit some commonly known inverse methods, we consider Gibbs distribution as prior: Here, P(s) is an energy functional penalizing unwanted features of s Here, P(s) is an energy functional penalizing unwanted features of s The MAP-estimate is then given by: The MAP-estimate is then given by:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Some choices for P(s) used in EEG/MEG Minimum Norm Estimation (MNE), see Minimum Norm Estimation (MNE), see Hämäläinen and Ilmoniemi, 1984

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Some choices for P(s) used in EEG/MEG Weighted Minimum Norm Estimation (WMNE), see Weighted Minimum Norm Estimation (WMNE), see Dale and Sereno, 1993 Specific choices for WMNE: Specific choices for WMNE: Fuchs et al., 1999

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: sLORETA standardized LOw REsolution electromagnetic TomogrAphy (sLORETA), see standardized LOw REsolution electromagnetic TomogrAphy (sLORETA), see Pascual-Marqui, 2002 The MAP estimate (which is the MNE) is standardized by the posterior covariance, yielding a pseudo-statistic of F-type for the source amplitude at a source space node

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Brain activity is a complex process comprising many different spatial patterns No fixed prior can model all of these phenomena without becoming uninformative, that is, not able to deliver the needed additional a-priori information This problem can be solved by introducing an adaptive, data-driven element into the estimation process

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: The idea of Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM) is to let the same data determine the appropriate model used for the inversion of these data by extending the model by a new level of inference: The prior on S is not fixed but random, determined by values of additional parameters called hyperparameters The hyperparameters  follow an a-priori assumed distribution (the so-called hyperprior p hpr (  )) and are subject to estimation schemes, too. As this construction follows a top-down scheme, it is called hierarchical modeling:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics for EEG/MEG application The hierarchical model used in most methods for EEG/MEG relies on a special construction of the prior called Gaussian scale mixture or conditionally Gaussian hypermodel ( The hierarchical model used in most methods for EEG/MEG relies on a special construction of the prior called Gaussian scale mixture or conditionally Gaussian hypermodel ( Calvetti et al., 2009; Wipf and Nagarajan, 2009) p pr (s|  ) is a Gaussian density with zero mean and a covariance determined by  :

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics for EEG/MEG application

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics: Our chosen posterior

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics:

CM estimation: Blocked Gibbs sampling, a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) scheme ( CM estimation: Blocked Gibbs sampling, a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) scheme ( Nummenmaa et al., 2007; Calvetti et al., 2009) MAP estimation: Iterative alternating sequential (IAS) ( MAP estimation: Iterative alternating sequential (IAS) ( Calvetti et al., 2009)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Mathematics:

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Goal of our study Step 1: Computed forward EEG for reference source (green dipole) Step 1: Computed forward EEG for reference source (green dipole) Step 2: Computed HBM inverse solution without indicating the number of sources (yellow-orange-red current density distribution on source space) Step 2: Computed HBM inverse solution without indicating the number of sources (yellow-orange-red current density distribution on source space)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Validation means: DLE and SP

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Validation means: EMD

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Validation means: Source depth

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: Head model

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: EEG sensors

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: Full-cap (f-cap), realistic cap (r-cap)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: Source space and EEG lead field

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: Source space

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Study 1: Single dipole reconstruction

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Methods: Generation of noisy measurement data

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Results: Single focal source scenario Step 1: Computed forward EEG for reference source (green dipole), add noise Step 1: Computed forward EEG for reference source (green dipole), add noise Step 2: Computed HBM inverse solution without indicating the number of sources (yellow-orange-red current density distribution on source space) Step 2: Computed HBM inverse solution without indicating the number of sources (yellow-orange-red current density distribution on source space)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Single focal source scenario

HBM: Conditional Mean (CM) estimate

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Single focal source scenario HBM: CM followed by Maximum A-Posteriori estimate (MAP)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Study 1: Single focal source scenario

A mark within the area underneath the y=x line indicates that the dipole has been reconstructed too close to the surface A mark within the area underneath the y=x line indicates that the dipole has been reconstructed too close to the surface A mark above the line indicates the opposite A mark above the line indicates the opposite q ab denotes the percentage of marks above the y=x line minus 0.5 (optimally: q ab = 0) q ab denotes the percentage of marks above the y=x line minus 0.5 (optimally: q ab = 0)

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling : Single focal source scenario

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Study 1: Single focal source scenario

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Study 2: Two sources scenario

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Study 2: Two sources scenario

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling (HBM): Study 3: Three sources scenario

Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling: Study 3: Three sources scenario

Thank you for your attention!