Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Enhancing Brain Source Reconstruction through Physics-Informed 3D Neural Networks

Published 31 Oct 2024 in eess.IV and cs.LG | (2411.00143v1)

Abstract: Reconstructing brain sources is a fundamental challenge in neuroscience, crucial for understanding brain function and dysfunction. Electroencephalography (EEG) signals have a high temporal resolution. However, identifying the correct spatial location of brain sources from these signals remains difficult due to the ill-posed structure of the problem. Traditional methods predominantly rely on manually crafted priors, missing the flexibility of data-driven learning, while recent deep learning approaches focus on end-to-end learning, typically using the physical information of the forward model only for generating training data. We propose the novel hybrid method 3D-PIUNet for EEG source localization that effectively integrates the strengths of traditional and deep learning techniques. 3D-PIUNet starts from an initial physics-informed estimate by using the pseudo inverse to map from measurements to source space. Secondly, by viewing the brain as a 3D volume, we use a 3D convolutional U-Net to capture spatial dependencies and refine the solution according to the learned data prior. Training the model relies on simulated pseudo-realistic brain source data, covering different source distributions. Trained on this data, our model significantly improves spatial accuracy, demonstrating superior performance over both traditional and end-to-end data-driven methods. Additionally, we validate our findings with real EEG data from a visual task, where 3D-PIUNet successfully identifies the visual cortex and reconstructs the expected temporal behavior, thereby showcasing its practical applicability.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (68)
  1. C. M. Michel, M. M. Murray et al., “EEG source imaging,” Clinical neurophysiology, vol. 115, no. 10, pp. 2195–2222, 2004.
  2. B. He, A. Sohrabpour et al., “Electrophysiological source imaging: a noninvasive window to brain dynamics,” Annual review of biomedical engineering, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 171–196, 2018.
  3. S. Baillet, J. C. Mosher, and R. M. Leahy, “Electromagnetic brain mapping,” IEEE Signal processing magazine, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 14–30, 2001.
  4. M. S. Hämäläinen and R. J. Ilmoniemi, “Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain: minimum norm estimates,” Medical & biological engineering & computing, vol. 32, pp. 35–42, 1994.
  5. T. Delatolas, M. Antonakakis et al., “EEG source analysis with a convolutional neural network and finite element analysis,” in 2023 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC).   IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–4.
  6. R. Sun, A. Sohrabpour et al., “Deep neural networks constrained by neural mass models improve electrophysiological source imaging of spatiotemporal brain dynamics,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119, no. 31, p. e2201128119, 2022.
  7. L. Hecker, R. Rupprecht et al., “Convdip: A convolutional neural network for better EEG source imaging,” Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 15, p. 569918, 2021.
  8. A. W. Thomas, H. R. Heekeren et al., “Analyzing neuroimaging data through recurrent deep learning models,” Frontiers in neuroscience, vol. 13, p. 1321, 2019.
  9. R. Sun, W. Zhang et al., “Deep learning based source imaging provides strong sublobar localization of epileptogenic zone from MEG interictal spikes,” NeuroImage, vol. 281, p. 120366, 2023.
  10. R. D. Pascual-Marqui, “Discrete, 3d distributed, linear imaging methods of electric neuronal activity. part 1: exact, zero error localization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:0710.3341, 2007.
  11. M. Scherg and D. Von Cramon, “Two bilateral sources of the late AEP as identified by a spatio-temporal dipole model,” Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 32–44, 1985.
  12. M. Scherg, “Fundamentals of dipole source potential analysis,” Auditory evoked magnetic fields and electric potentials. Advances in audiology, vol. 6, no. 40-69, p. 25, 1990.
  13. C. M. Michel and B. He, “EEG source localization,” Handbook of clinical neurology, vol. 160, pp. 85–101, 2019.
  14. F.-H. Lin, T. Witzel et al., “Assessing and improving the spatial accuracy in MEG source localization by depth-weighted minimum-norm estimates,” Neuroimage, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 160–171, 2006.
  15. A. M. Dale, A. K. Liu et al., “Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity,” Neuron, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 55–67, 2000.
  16. R. D. Pascual-Marqui, C. M. Michel, and D. Lehmann, “Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: a new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain,” International Journal of psychophysiology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 49–65, 1994.
  17. R. D. Pascual-Marqui et al., “Standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA): technical details,” Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol, vol. 24, no. Suppl D, pp. 5–12, 2002.
  18. G. Pellegrino, T. Hedrich et al., “Accuracy and spatial properties of distributed magnetic source imaging techniques in the investigation of focal epilepsy patients,” Human brain mapping, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 3019–3033, 2020.
  19. R. Tibshirani, “Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 267–288, 1996.
  20. K. Matsuura and Y. Okabe, “Selective minimum-norm solution of the biomagnetic inverse problem,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 608–615, 1995.
  21. S. Haufe, R. Tomioka et al., “Large-scale EEG/MEG source localization with spatial flexibility,” NeuroImage, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 851–859, 2011.
  22. M. E. Tipping, “Sparse Bayesian learning and the relevance vector machine,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 1, no. Jun, pp. 211–244, 2001.
  23. D. P. Wipf and S. S. Nagarajan, “Sparse estimation using general likelihoods and non-factorial priors,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2009, pp. 2071–2079.
  24. A. Hashemi, C. Cai et al., “Unification of sparse bayesian learning algorithms for electromagnetic brain imaging with the majorization minimization framework,” NeuroImage, vol. 239, p. 118309, 2021.
  25. C. Cai, A. Hashemi et al., “Robust estimation of noise for electromagnetic brain imaging with the Champagne algorithm,” NeuroImage, vol. 225, p. 117411, 2021.
  26. A. Hashemi, C. Cai et al., “Joint learning of full-structure noise in hierarchical bayesian regression models,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 2022.
  27. R. A. Chowdhury, J. M. Lina et al., “MEG source localization of spatially extended generators of epileptic activity: comparing entropic and hierarchical bayesian approaches,” PloS one, vol. 8, no. 2, p. e55969, 2013.
  28. Y. Roy, H. Banville et al., “Deep learning-based electroencephalography analysis: a systematic review,” Journal of neural engineering, vol. 16, no. 5, p. 051001, 2019.
  29. P. Sanz Leon, S. A. Knock et al., “The virtual brain: a simulator of primate brain network dynamics,” Frontiers in neuroinformatics, vol. 7, p. 10, 2013.
  30. M. Breakspear, “Dynamic models of large-scale brain activity,” Nature neuroscience, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 340–352, 2017.
  31. D. Pantazis and A. Adler, “MEG source localization via deep learning,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 13, p. 4278, 2021.
  32. G. Huang, K. Liu et al., “Electromagnetic source imaging via a data-synthesis-based convolutional encoder–decoder network,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2022.
  33. M. Jiao, S. Yang et al., “Multi-modal electrophysiological source imaging with attention neural networks based on deep fusion of EEG and MEG,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2024.
  34. J. Thomas, J. Jin et al., “Automated detection of interictal epileptiform discharges from scalp electroencephalograms by convolutional neural networks,” International journal of neural systems, vol. 30, no. 11, p. 2050030, 2020.
  35. M. Jiao, G. Wan et al., “A graph fourier transform based bidirectional long short-term memory neural network for electrophysiological source imaging,” Frontiers in neuroscience, vol. 16, p. 867466, 2022.
  36. Z. Yu, A. Kachenoura et al., “Electrophysiological brain imaging based on simulation-driven deep learning in the context of epilepsy,” NeuroImage, vol. 285, p. 120490, 2024.
  37. B. Zhang, D. Li, and D. Wang, “DCT based multi-head attention-BiGRU model for EEG source location,” Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, vol. 93, p. 106171, 2024.
  38. M. Raissi, P. Perdikaris, and G. E. Karniadakis, “Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations,” Journal of Computational Physics, vol. 378, pp. 686–707, 2019.
  39. S. Chmiela, A. Tkatchenko et al., “Machine learning of accurate energy-conserving molecular force fields,” Science advances, vol. 3, no. 5, p. e1603015, 2017.
  40. K. Nicoli, C. J. Anders et al., “Physics-informed bayesian optimization of variational quantum circuits,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 36, 2024.
  41. K. H. Jin, M. T. McCann et al., “Deep convolutional neural network for inverse problems in imaging,” IEEE transactions on image processing, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 4509–4522, 2017.
  42. C. M. Hyun, H. P. Kim et al., “Deep learning for undersampled MRI reconstruction,” Physics in Medicine & Biology, vol. 63, no. 13, p. 135007, 2018.
  43. A. Gramfort, M. Luessi et al., “MNE software for processing MEG and EEG data,” NeuroImage, vol. 86, pp. 446–460, 2014.
  44. Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436–444, 2015.
  45. O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th International Conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, Proceedings, Part III 18.   Springer, 2015, pp. 234–241.
  46. A. Q. Nichol and P. Dhariwal, “Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models,” in International Conference on Machine Learning.   PMLR, 2021, pp. 8162–8171.
  47. Y. Wu and K. He, “Group normalization,” in Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2018, pp. 3–19.
  48. S. Elfwing, E. Uchibe, and K. Doya, “Sigmoid-weighted linear units for neural network function approximation in reinforcement learning,” Neural networks, vol. 107, pp. 3–11, 2018.
  49. K. He, X. Zhang et al., “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 770–778.
  50. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer et al., “Attention is all you need,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  51. A. Dosovitskiy, L. Beyer et al., “An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020.
  52. L. Hecker, R. Rupprecht et al., “Long-short term memory networks for electric source imaging with distributed dipole models,” bioRxiv, 2022.
  53. D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014.
  54. M. Fuchs, J. Kastner et al., “A standardized boundary element method volume conductor model,” Clinical neurophysiology, vol. 113, no. 5, pp. 702–712, 2002.
  55. A. Gramfort, M. Luessi et al., “MEG and EEG data analysis with MNE-Python,” Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 7, no. 267, pp. 1–13, 2013.
  56. B. Fischl, M. I. Sereno et al., “High-resolution intersubject averaging and a coordinate system for the cortical surface,” Human brain mapping, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 272–284, 1999.
  57. J. Kaipio and E. Somersalo, “Statistical inverse problems: discretization, model reduction and inverse crimes,” Journal of computational and applied mathematics, vol. 198, no. 2, pp. 493–504, 2007.
  58. C. H. Wolters, S. Lew et al., “Combined EEG/MEG source analysis using calibrated finite element head models,” Biomedizinische Technik/Biomedical Engineering. Rostock, Germany: Walter de Gruyter, vol. 55, no. Suppl 1, pp. 64–68, 2010.
  59. S. Haufe, V. V. Nikulin et al., “Combining sparsity and rotational invariance in EEG/MEG source reconstruction,” NeuroImage, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 726–738, 2008.
  60. Y. Rubner, C. Tomasi, and L. J. Guibas, “The earth mover’s distance as a metric for image retrieval,” International journal of computer vision, vol. 40, pp. 99–121, 2000.
  61. R. Flamary, N. Courty et al., “POT: Python optimal transport,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 22, no. 78, pp. 1–8, 2021.
  62. A. T. Gifford, K. Dwivedi et al., “A large and rich EEG dataset for modeling human visual object recognition,” NeuroImage, vol. 264, p. 119754, 2022.
  63. H. Intraub, “Rapid conceptual identification of sequentially presented pictures.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 604, 1981.
  64. T. Grootswagers, A. K. Robinson, and T. A. Carlson, “The representational dynamics of visual objects in rapid serial visual processing streams,” NeuroImage, vol. 188, pp. 668–679, 2019.
  65. M. Guggenmos, P. Sterzer, and R. M. Cichy, “Multivariate pattern analysis for MEG: A comparison of dissimilarity measures,” Neuroimage, vol. 173, pp. 434–447, 2018.
  66. L. Sörnmo and P. Laguna, “Chapter 4 - evoked potentials,” in Bioelectrical Signal Processing in Cardiac and Neurological Applications, ser. Biomedical Engineering.   Burlington: Academic Press, 2005, pp. 181–336.
  67. D. J. Creel, “Visually evoked potentials,” Handbook of clinical neurology, vol. 160, pp. 501–522, 2019.
  68. W. Samek, G. Montavon et al., “Explaining deep neural networks and beyond: A review of methods and applications,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 247–278, 2021.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.