[Eeglablist] ICA component labeling by EEG lab

[Scott Makeig]

Sara -

Finding two components with near-identical maps arises from some problem in
the data, I believe. Perhaps try running the decomposition with one less
dimension (using 'pca')? The ICLabel function is probabilistic, but is
based not only on the map but on the power spectrum of the IC. Did you
compare the power spectra of the two ICs to see if, indeed, one contains
more line frequency power? Are the scalp maps dipolar (as if projecting
from a single point/patch in the cortex? Typically, maps of line noise ICs
do not look dipolar...

Scott Makeig

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 9:40 AM Sara Kamali via eeglablist <
eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu> wrote:

>
> Hi All,
>
>
> I am trying to remove bad components from my data. There are two
> components next to each other with very similar brain maps, activity
> power spectrums, and epoched activities. However, one of them is
> labeled as a brain component with 52.5% probability and the other one
> as line noise with 48.7%  and only a 7.9% probability of being a brain
> component. How do we treat components like this? From the signals and
> brain maps, it is not possible to tell them apart. How much should we
> trust the labeling by EEG lab?
>
> Thank you in advance
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Scott Makeig, Research Scientist and Director, Swartz Center for
Computational Neuroscience, Institute for Neural Computation, University of
California San Diego, La Jolla CA 92093-0559, http://sccn.ucsd.edu/~scott