Differential EEG

Doktor DynaSoar targeting at OMCL.mil
Fri Mar 5 19:13:49 EST 2004


On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 02:56:33 -0400, "NMF" <nm_fournier at ns.sympatico.ca>
wrote:

} Another aside point.  The measurement features that you are suggesting,
} using differential EEG, still runs into the same problem that any
} electroencephalographic approach would fall to.  You still run into the
} inverse problem regarding the localization of the signal.  Even the new
} statistical approaches still can't adequately solve this problem with
} complete absolute certainity, hence the reason why any estimate lies within
} a margin of statistical probability and uncertainity.
} 

Very true, and I really even don't put much faith in simultaneous
EEG/fMRI results, mostly due to the massive statistical correction due
to SPM.

Most source localization is forced solutions. For instance, dipoles.
They are the result of a calculation. Nobody seriously expects them to
be a real, functional phenomenon and part of neural processing. They
CAN coincide with a neural generator; I've shown some myself. But a
forced result maintains its own credibility problem beyind the
statistical considerations.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list