MEG Signal Reconstruction via Low-Rank Matrix Recovery for Source Imaging in Simulations

  • Yegang Hu
  • Jicong ZhangEmail author
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 810)


Source imaging with magnetoencephalography (MEG) has obtained good spatial accuracy on the shallow sources, and has been successfully applied in the brain cognition and the diagnosis of brain disease. However, its utility with locating deep sources may be more challenging. In this study, a new source imaging method was proposed to find real brain activity on deep locations. A sensor array with MEG measurements including 306 channels was represented as a low-rank matrix plus sparse noises. The low-rank matrix was used to reconstruct the MEG signal and remove interference. The source model was estimated using the reconstructed MEG signal and minimum variance beamforming. Simulations with a realistic head model indicated that the proposed method was effective.


Source imaging Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Low-rank matrix recovery Beamforming Signal reconstruction 



This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant Number: 2016YFF0201002), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Numbers: 61301005, 61572055), the Beihang University Hefei Innovation Research Institute, Project of ‘The Thousand Talents Plan’ for Young Professionals, and ‘The Thousand Talents Plan’ Workstation between Beihang University and Jiangsu Yuwell Medical Equipment and Supply Co. Ltd.


  1. 1.
    Barnes, G.R., Hillebrand, A.: Statistical flattening of MEG beamformer images. Hum. Brain Mapp. 18, 1–12 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zumer, J.M., Attias, H.T., Sekihara, K., Nagarajan, S.S.: A probabilistic algorithm integrating source localization and noise suppression for MEG and EEG data. Neuroimage 37, 102–115 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baillet, S.: Magnetoencephalography for brain electrophysiology and imaging. Nat. Neurosci. 20, 327–339 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nissen, I.A., Stam, C.J., Citroen, J., Reijneveldb, J.C., Hillebranda, A.: Preoperative evaluation using magnetoencephalography: experience in 382 epilepsy patients. Epilepsy Res. 124, 23–33 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu, J.Y., et al.: Magnetic source imaging localizes epileptogenic zone in children with tuberous sclerosis complex. Neurology 66, 1270–1272 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nissen, I.A., et al.: Identifying the epileptogenic zone in interictal resting-state MEG source-space networks. Epilepsia 58, 137–148 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mattout, J., Phillips, C., Penny, W.D., et al.: MEG source localization under multiple constraints: an extended Bayesian framework. NeuroImage 30, 753–767 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grech, R., Cassar, T., Muscat, J., Camilleri, K.P., Fabri, S.G., Zervakis, M., Xanthopoulos, P., Sakkalis, V., Vanrumste, B.: Review on solving the inverse problem in EEG source analysis. J. NeuroEng. Rehabil. 5, 25 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lu, H., Li, Y., Mu, S., Wang, D., Kim, H., Serikawa, S.: Motor anomaly detection for unmanned aerial vehicles using reinforcement learning. IEEE Internet Things J. 5(4), 2315–2322 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Veen, B.D., van Drongelen, W., Yuchtman, M., Suzuki, A.: Localization of brain electrical activity via linearly constrained minimum variance spatial filtering. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 44, 867–880 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oshino, S., Kato, A., Wakayama, A., et al.: Magnetoencephalographic analysis of cortical oscillatory activity in patients with brain tumors: synthetic aperture magnetometry (SAM) functional imaging of delta band activity. Neuroimage 34, 957–964 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mosher, J.C., Leahy, R.M.: Recursive MUSIC: a framework for EEG and MEG source localization. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 45, 1342–1354 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Komssi, S., Huttunen, J., Aronen, H.J., et al.: EEG minimum-norm estimation compared with MEG dipole fitting in the localization of somatosensory sources at S1. Clin. Neurophysiol. 115, 534–542 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hillebrand, A., Singh, K.D., Holliday, I.E., Furlong, P.L., Barnes, G.R.: A new approach to neuroimaging with magnetoencephalography. Hum. Brain Mapp. 25, 199–211 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shigeto, H., Morioka, T., Hisada, K., Nishio, S., Ishibashi, H., Kira, D., Tobimatsu, S., Kato, M.: Feasibility and limitations of magnetoencephalographic detection of epileptic discharges: simultaneous recording of magnetic fields and electrocorticography. Neurol. Res. 24, 531–536 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lin, F.H., Witzel, T., Ahlfors, S.P., et al.: Assessing and improving the spatial accuracy in MEG source localization by depth-weighted minimum-norm estimates. Neuroimage 31, 160–171 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen, C.F., Wei, C.P., Wang, Y.C.F.: Low-rank matrix recovery with structural incoherence for robust face recognition. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recogn. CVPR, 2618–2625 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, G., Lin, Z., Yan, S., et al.: Robust recovery of subspace structures by low-rank representation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 35, 171–184 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shabalin, A.A., Nobel, A.B.: Reconstruction of a low-rank matrix in the presence of Gaussian noise. J. Multivar. Anal. 118, 67–76 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, H., He, W., Zhang, L., et al.: Hyperspectral image restoration using low-rank matrix recovery. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 52, 4729–4743 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Candès, E.J., Li, X., Ma, Y., et al.: Robust principal component analysis? J. ACM 58, 11 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Diwakar, M., Huang, M.X., Srinivasan, R., Harrington, D.L., Robb, A., Angeles, A., Muzzatti, L., Pakdaman, R., Song, T., Theilmann, R.J., et al.: Dual-core beamformer for obtaining highly correlated neuronal networks in MEG. Neuroimage 54, 253–263 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang, J., Liu, C.: On linearly constrained minimum variance beamforming. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 16, 2099–2145 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brookes, M.J., Stevenson, C.M., Barnes, G.R., et al.: Beamformer reconstruction of correlated sources using a modified source model. Neuroimage 34, 1454–1465 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wright, J., Ganesh, A., Rao, S., Ma, Y.: Robust principal component analysis: exact recovery of corrupted low-rank matrices. In: Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pp. 2080–2088 (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lu, H., Li, Y., Chen, M., Kim, H., Serikawa, S.: Brain intelligence: go beyond artificial intelligence. Mob. Netw. Appl. 23, 368–375 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nolte, G.: The magnetic lead field theorem in the quasi-static approximation and its use for magnetoencephalography forward calculation in realistic volume conductors. Phys. Med. Biol. 48, 3637 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Besl, P.J., McKay, N.D.: A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. 14, 239–256 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Groß, J., Ioannides, A.A.: Linear transformations of data space in MEG. Phys. Med. Biol. 44, 2081 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Biological Science and Medical EngineeringBeihang UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Beijing Advanced Innovation Centre for Big Data-Based Precision Medicine, Beihang UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Beijing Advanced Innovation Centre for Biomedical Engineering, Beihang UniversityBeijingChina
  4. 4.Hefei Innovation Research Institute, Beihang UniversityHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations