Biology subjects

Nunez Ponasso, G. C.

Publications and source records attributed to Nunez Ponasso, G. C..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2024

Fast and Accurate EEG/MEG BEM-Based Forward Problem Solution for High-Resolution Head Models

A BEM (boundary element method) based approach is developed to accurately solve an EEG/MEG forward problem for a modern high-resolution head model in approximately 60 seconds using a common workstation. The method utilizes a charge-based BEM with fast multipole acceleration (BEM-FMM) and a "smart" mesh pre-refinement (called b-refinement) close to the singular source(s). No costly matrix-filling or direct solution steps typical for the standard BEM are required; the method generates on-skin voltages as well as MEG magnetic fields for high-resolution head models in approximately 60 seconds after initial model assembly. The method is verified both theoretically and experimentally.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2024

Accuracy of dipole source reconstruction in the 3-layerBEM model against the 5-layer BEM-FMM model

ObjectiveTo compare cortical dipole fitting spatial accuracy between the widely used yet highly simplified 3-layer and modern more realistic 5-layer BEM-FMM models with and without adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) methods. MethodsWe generate simulated noiseless 256-channel EEG data from 5-layer (7-compartment) meshes of 15 subjects from the Connectome Young Adult dataset. For each subject, we test four dipole positions, three sets of conductivity values, and two types of head segmentation. We use the boundary element method (BEM) with fast multipole method (FMM) acceleration, with or without (AMR), for forward modeling. Dipole fitting is carried out with the FieldTrip MATLAB toolbox. ResultsThe average position error (across all tested dipoles, subjects, and models) is [~]4 mm, with a standard deviation of [~]2 mm. The orientation error is [~]20{degrees} on average, with a standard deviation of [~]15{degrees}. Without AMR, the numerical inaccuracies produce a larger disagreement between the 3- and 5-layer models, with an average position error of [~]8 mm (6 mm standard deviation), and an orientation error of 28{degrees} (28{degrees} standard deviation). ConclusionsThe low-resolution 3-layer models provide excellent accuracy in dipole localization. On the other hand, dipole orientation is retrieved less accurately. Therefore, certain applications may require more realistic models for practical source reconstruction. AMR is a critical component for improving the accuracy of forward EEG computations using a high-resolution 5-layer volume conduction model. SignificanceImproving EEG source reconstruction accuracy is important for several clinical applications, including epilepsy and other seizure-inducing conditions.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2024

Electromagnetic Modeling within a Microscopically Realistic Brain - Implications for Brain Stimulation

Modeling brain stimulation at the microscopic scale may reveal new paradigms for various stimulation modalities. We present the largest map to date of extracellular electric field distributions within a layer L2/L3 mouse primary visual cortex brain sample. This was enabled by the automated analysis of serial section electron microscopy images with improved handling of image defects, covering a volume of 250 x 140 x 90 m3. The map was obtained by applying a uniform brain stimulation electric field at three different polarizations and accurately computing microscopic field perturbations using the boundary element fast multipole method. We used the map to identify the effect of microscopic field perturbations on the activation thresholds of individual neurons. Previous relevant studies modeled a macroscopically homogeneous cortical volume. Our result shows that the microscopic field perturbations - an electric field spatial noise with a mean value of zero - only modestly influence the macroscopically predicted stimulation field strengths necessary for neuronal activation. The thresholds do not change by more than 10% on average. Under the stated limitations and assumptions of our method, this result justifies the conventional theory of "invisible" neurons embedded in a macroscopic brain model for transcranial magnetic and transcranial electrical stimulation. However, our result is solely sample-specific and largely neglects the effect of the microcapillary network. Furthermore, we only considered the uniform impressed field and a single- pulse stimulation time course. Significance statementThis study is arguably the first attempt to model brain stimulation at the microscopic scale, enabled by automated analysis of modern scanning electron microscopy images of the brain. It concentrates on modeling microscopic perturbations of the extracellular electric field caused by the physical cell structure and is applicable to any type of brain stimulation. Data availability statementPost-processed cell CAD models (383, stl format), microcapillary CAD models (34, stl format), post-processed neuron morphologies (267, swc format), extracellular electric field and potential distributions at different polarizations (267x3, MATLAB format), *.ses projects files for biophysical modeling with Neuron software (267x2, Neuron format), and computed neuron activating thresholds at different conditions (267x8, Excel tables, without the sample polarization correction from Section 2.8) are made available online through BossDB, a volumetric open-source database for 3D and 4D neuroscience data.

neuroscience↗