Contrasts & Inference - EEG & MEG Himn Sabir 1. Topics 1 st level analysis 2 nd level analysis Space-Time SPMs Time-frequency analysis Conclusion 2.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
Advertisements

SPM – introduction & orientation introduction to the SPM software and resources introduction to the SPM software and resources.
Hierarchical Models and
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND SOURCE LOCALISATION
Contrasts & Inference - EEG & MEG Outi Tuomainen & Rimona Weil mfd.
Topological Inference Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM Course London, May 2014 Many thanks to Justin.
Overview Contrast in fMRI v contrast in MEG 2D interpolation 1 st level 2 nd level Which buttons? Other clever things with SPM for MEG Things to bear in.
Classical inference and design efficiency Zurich SPM Course 2014
The General Linear Model (GLM) Methods & models for fMRI data analysis in neuroeconomics November 2010 Klaas Enno Stephan Laboratory for Social & Neural.
Group analyses Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London Will Penny.
The General Linear Model (GLM)
1st level analysis: basis functions and correlated regressors
Introduction to SPM SPM fMRI Course London, May 2012 Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London.
1st Level Analysis Design Matrix, Contrasts & Inference
General Linear Model & Classical Inference
General Linear Model & Classical Inference Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM M/EEGCourse London, May.
2nd Level Analysis Jennifer Marchant & Tessa Dekker
Methods for Dummies Second level analysis
With many thanks for slides & images to: FIL Methods group, Virginia Flanagin and Klaas Enno Stephan Dr. Frederike Petzschner Translational Neuromodeling.
Source localization for EEG and MEG Methods for Dummies 2006 FIL Bahador Bahrami.
SENSOR LEVEL ANALYSIS AND SOURCE LOCALISATION in M/EEG METHODS FOR DUMMIES Mrudul Bhatt & Wenjun Bai.
Analysis of fMRI data with linear models Typical fMRI processing steps Image reconstruction Slice time correction Motion correction Temporal filtering.
SPM Course Zurich, February 2015 Group Analyses Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London With many thanks to.
DCM for ERPs/EFPs Clare Palmer & Elina Jacobs Expert: Dimitris Pinotsis.
Multiple comparisons in M/EEG analysis Gareth Barnes Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM M/EEG Course London, May 2013.
Bayesian Inference and Posterior Probability Maps Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, University College London, UK SPM Course,
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
Contrasts & Statistical Inference
1 Experimental Design, Contrasts & Inference - EEG & MEG Joseph Brooks (ICN) Maria Joao (FIL) Methods for Dummies 2007 Wellcome Department For Neuroimaging.
Methods for Dummies Overview and Introduction
Methods for Dummies Second level Analysis (for fMRI) Chris Hardy, Alex Fellows Expert: Guillaume Flandin.
Statistical Analysis An Introduction to MRI Physics and Analysis Michael Jay Schillaci, PhD Monday, April 7 th, 2007.
The General Linear Model Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM fMRI Course London, May 2012.
SPM short – Mai 2008 Linear Models and Contrasts Stefan Kiebel Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging.
Multiple comparisons problem and solutions James M. Kilner
Variance components Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience Institute of Neurology, UCL, London Stefan Kiebel.
The general linear model and Statistical Parametric Mapping II: GLM for fMRI Alexa Morcom and Stefan Kiebel, Rik Henson, Andrew Holmes & J-B Poline.
M/EEG: Statistical analysis and source localisation Expert: Vladimir Litvak Mathilde De Kerangal & Anne Löffler Methods for Dummies, March 2, 2016.
Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM Course Zurich, February 2008 Bayesian Inference.
Bayesian Inference in SPM2 Will Penny K. Friston, J. Ashburner, J.-B. Poline, R. Henson, S. Kiebel, D. Glaser Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience,
The General Linear Model Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM fMRI Course London, October 2012.
General Linear Model & Classical Inference London, SPM-M/EEG course May 2016 Sven Bestmann, Sobell Department, Institute of Neurology, UCL
Methods for Dummies M/EEG Analysis: Contrasts, Inferences and Source Localisation Diana Omigie Stjepana Kovac.
Group Analyses Guillaume Flandin SPM Course London, October 2016
Topological Inference
General Linear Model & Classical Inference
The general linear model and Statistical Parametric Mapping
2nd Level Analysis Methods for Dummies 2010/11 - 2nd Feb 2011
Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London
Group analyses Thanks to Will Penny for slides and content
and Stefan Kiebel, Rik Henson, Andrew Holmes & J-B Poline
M/EEG Statistical Analysis & Source Localization
Contrasts & Statistical Inference
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
The General Linear Model
Group analyses Thanks to Will Penny for slides and content
The general linear model and Statistical Parametric Mapping
Dynamic Causal Modelling for M/EEG
The General Linear Model
Hierarchical Models and
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
M/EEG Statistical Analysis & Source Localization
Contrasts & Statistical Inference
The General Linear Model
WellcomeTrust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
The General Linear Model
Wellcome Dept. of Imaging Neuroscience University College London
Contrasts & Statistical Inference
Presentation transcript:

Contrasts & Inference - EEG & MEG Himn Sabir 1

Topics 1 st level analysis 2 nd level analysis Space-Time SPMs Time-frequency analysis Conclusion 2

Voxel Space 3 (revisited) 2D scalp projection (interpolation in sensor space) 3D source reconstruction (brain space) 2/3D images over peri-stimulus time bins Data ready to be analysed

M/EEG modelling and statistics 4 Epoched time-series data Data is analysed using the General Linear model at each voxel and Random Field Theory to adjust the p-values for multiple comparisons. Typically one wants to analyse multiple subjects’ data acquired under multiple conditions 2-Level Model Time Intensity Time Single voxel time series Model specification Parameter estimation Hypothesis Statistic SPM

1 st Level Analysis 5 Epoched time-series data At the 1 st level, we select periods or time points in peri-stimulous time that we would like to analyse. Choice made a priori. Example: if we were interested in the N170 component, one could average the data between 150 and 190 milliseconds. Time is treated as an experimental factor and we form weighted-sums over peri- stimulus time to provide input to the 2 nd level 0 1 Similar to fMRI analysis. The aim of the 1 st level is to compute contrast images that provide the input to the second level. Difference: here we are not modelling the data at 1 st level, but simply forming weighted sums of data over time

1 st Level Analysis 6 Epoched time-series data Example: EEG data / 8 subjects / 2 conditions 1.Choose Specify 1st-level 2.Select 2D images 3.Specify M/EEG matfile 4.Specify Time Interval For each subject 5. Click Compute Timing information SPM output: 2 contrast images average_con_0001.img

2 nd Level Analysis 7 Epoched time-series data Given the contrast images from the 1 st level (weighted sums), we can now test for differences between conditions or between subjects. = + second level nd level contrast 2 nd level model = used in fMRI SPM output: Voxel map, where each voxel contains one statistical value The associated p-value is adjusted for multiple comparisons

2 nd Level Analysis 8 Epoched time-series data Example: EEG data / 8 subjects / 2 conditions 1. Specify 2nd-level 2. Specify Design SPM output: Design Matrix

2 nd Level Analysis 9 Epoched time-series data Example: EEG data / 8 subjects / 2 conditions 3. Click Estimate 4. Click Results 5. Define Contrasts Output: Ignore brain outline: “Regions” within the 2D map in which the difference between the two conditions is significant

Space-Time SPMs (Sensor Maps over Time) 10 Time as another dimension of a Random Field Advantages: If we had no a priori knowledge where and when the difference between two conditions would emerge Especially useful for time-frequency power analysis Both approaches available: choice depends on the data We can treat time as another dimension and construct 3D images (2D space + 1D peri-stimulus time) We can test for activations in space and time Disadvantages: not possible to make inferences about the temporal extent of evoked responses

Space-Time SPMs (Sensor Maps over Time) 11 How this is done in SMP8 Example: EEG data / 1 subject / 2 conditions (344 trials) 2. Choose options 32x32x161 images for each trial / condition 3.Statistical Analysis (test across trials) 4. Estimate + Results 5. Create contrasts 1.Choose 2D-to-3D image on the SPM8 menu and epoched data: e_eeg.mat

Space-Time SPMs (Sensor Maps over Time) 12 How this is done in SMP8 Example: EEG data / 1 subject / 2 conditions (344 trials) Ignore brain outline!!! More than 1 subject: Same procedure with averaged ERP data for each subject Specify contrasts and take them to the 2 nd level analysis Overlay with EEG image:

Time-Frequency analysis 13 Transform data into time-frequency domain Not phase-locked to the stimulus onset – not revealed with classical averaging methods [Tallon-Baudry et. al. 1999] Useful for evoked responses and induced responses: SPM uses the Morlet Wavelet Transform Wavelets: mathematical functions that can break a signal into different frequency components. The transform is a convolution The Power and Phase Angle can be computed from the wavelet coefficients:

Time-Frequency analysis 14 How this is done in SPM8: 1.Choose time-frequency on the SPM8 menu and epoched data: e_meg.mat 2. Choose options t1_e_eeg.mat and t2_e_eeg.mat power at each frequency, time and channel (t1*); phase angles (t2*) 3.Average 4.Display mt1_e_eeg.mat and mt2_e_eeg.mat Example: MEG data / 1 subject / 2 conditions (86 trials) 5. 2D Time-Frequency SPMs

Summary 15 (2D interpolation or 3D source reconstruction) 1 st Level Analysis (create weighted sums of the data over time) (contrast images = input to the 2 nd level) 2 nd Level Analysis (test for differences between conditions or groups) (similar to fMRI analysis) Time-Space SPMs (time as a dimension of the measured response variable) Time-Frequency Analysis (induced responses) Projection to voxel space

References S. J. Kiebel: 10 November ppt-slides on ERP analysis at htm htm S.J. Kiebel and K.J. Friston. Statistical Parametric Mapping for Event- Related Potentials I: Generic Considerations. NeuroImage, 22(2): , S.J. Kiebel and K.J. Friston. Statistical Parametric Mapping for Event- Related Potentials II: A Hierarchical Temporal Model. NeuroImage, 22(2): , Todd, C. Handy (ed.) Event-Related Potentials: A Methods Handbook. MIT Luck, S. J. (2005). An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique. MIT Press. 16

Thank You! 17 For difficult questions: (James Kilner)