Why bother to spatially embed EEG? Comments on Pritchard et al., Psychophysiology, 33, 362-368, 1996

Author(s): Lachaux, J. P., Thomasson, N., Martinerie, J.

Journal/Book: Psychophysiology. 1999; 36: 40 West 20Th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA. Cambridge Univ Press. 527-531.

Abstract: In a recent paper, Pritchard, Krieble, and Duke (Psychophysiology, 33, 362-368, 1996) studied the validity of spatial embedding of electroencephalographic (EEG) data and rejected this method in favor of time-delay embedding. The present paper describes the nonlinear characterization of brain dynamics using either spatial or time-delay embedding. We discuss the arguments published in Pritchard et al. (1996) and demonstrate that the spatial embedding cannot be rejected on this basis. We also point out the limitations. Of both spatial and time-delay embeddings related to the spatial extension and the high-dimensional dynamics of brain activity.

Note: Editorial Pezard L, Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, CNRS UPR 640, LENA, Unite Neurosci Cognit & Imagerie Cerebrale, 47 Bd Hop, F-75651 Paris 13, FRANCE

Keyword(s): nonlinear dynamics; electroencephalogram; embedding; high dimension; spatially extended systems; TIME-SERIES; CORRELATION DIMENSION; STRANGE ATTRACTORS; DYNAMICAL-SYSTEMS; SURROGATE DATA; RECONSTRUCTION; CHAOS; QUANTIFICATION; NOISE

Zurück | Weiter