[Eeglablist] DIPFIT: different residual variances for spherical and boudary head models.

Makoto Miyakoshi mmiyakoshi at ucsd.edu
Thu Apr 17 21:35:30 PDT 2014

Dear Tomek,

2% vs 40% does not sound right. Maybe something failed for MNI model
fitting. Have you confirmed in the log that it converged successfully?

MNI is physiologically much more valid so I would recommend you use MNI for
template head.


2014-04-16 8:15 GMT-07:00 Tomek Ligęza <tsl at poczta.fm>:

>  Dear list,
> I have an issue regarding different results when using the spherical
> (BESA) and the boundary (MNI) head models. Localisations of the dipoles are
> almost the same for the two models. However, the MNI model shows far
> greater residual variance for some dipoles compared with the BESA model.
> For example, the same dipole (from the same dataset) has RV = 2% for BESA
> model and RV = 40% for MNI model. This discrepancies can be seen mostly in
> the frontal regions of the brain.
> Does anyone know what causes this variation? Why the differences appear
> mainly in the frontal parts of the brain?
> Thanks in advance.
> Tomek
> _______________________________________________
> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu

Makoto Miyakoshi
Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience
Institute for Neural Computation, University of California San Diego
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20140417/d51ec10c/attachment.html>

More information about the eeglablist mailing list