[Eeglablist] (no subject)

[Ayda Ghahremani]

Dear EEGLAB,

Thanks to Tyler, Mokoto and David for your suggestions and providing your
references. Your help is indeed appreciated.

All the best,
Ayda

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 2:16 PM, David Groppe <david.m.groppe at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Ayda,
>    To add a bit to Makoto's great response, the disadvantage of having so
> few channels is that it impairs ICA's ability to cleanly separate sources.
> However, there are some nice simulation studies showing that when there are
> more EEG/iEEG sources than electrodes, ICA can still accurately unmix
> strong sources:
>
> Makeig, S., Jung, T.-P., Ghahremani, D., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2000).
> Independent component analysis of simulated ERP data. In T. Nakada (Ed.),
> Integrated Human Brain Science (pp. 123-146). New York: Elsevier.
>
> Kobayashi, K., James, C. J., Nakahori, T., Akiyama, T., &
> Gotman, J. (1999). Isolation of epileptiform discharges from unaveraged
> EEG by independent component analysis. Clinical Neurophysiology, 110(10),
> 1755-1763.
>
> So even with such few channels you may be able to get some accurate ICs.
>
> The advantage (in a way) of having so few channels is that you won't need
> much data for ICA to provide stable results:
>
> Groppe, D.M., Makeig, S., & Kutas, M. (2009) *Identifying reliable
> independent components via split-half comparisons*. *NeuroImage*, 45 pp.
> 1199-1211.
>
> I say "in a way" as when you have a lot of channels you can always
> approximate them with a lower number of principal components if need be.
> More data is generally always better.
>   Hope this helps,
>      -David
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Makoto Miyakoshi <mmiyakoshi at ucsd.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Ayda,
>>
>> Very interesting and promising application!
>>
>> > 1- Are ICA results still valid to apply in this situation?
>>
>> As long as they were recorded simultaneously with the same clock same
>> subject same sampling, yes.
>>
>> > 2- A total of 12 channels and large samples are enough to do the ICA? I
>> have looked into the literature, but I cannot find a consistent validated
>> report on the ICA on small channels.
>>
>> I published 16ch ERP studies with ICA but only for cleaning purpose. It's
>> fine, nothing is wrong with it.
>>
>> Makoto
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Ayda Ghahremani <
>> ghahremani.aida at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear EEGLAB,
>>>
>>> I have a question regarding the application of ICA to combined EEGs from
>>> scalp and LFPs from subcortical regions.
>>>
>>> 1- Are ICA results still valid to apply in this situation?
>>> 2- A total of 12 channels and large samples are enough to do the ICA? I
>>> have looked into the literature, but I cannot find a consistent validated
>>> report on the ICA on small channels.
>>>
>>> I appreciate your help on this,
>>> Ayda
>>>
>>> PhD Candidate,
>>> Toronto Western Hospital
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David Groppe, Ph.D.
> Institute Scientist
> Laboratory for Multimodal Human Brain Mapping
> Feinstein Institute for Medical Research
> Manhasset, New York
> http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~dgroppe/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20140916/c2d87e5c/attachment.html>