I am trying to localize sources of brain activity using MEG data. I first want to compute ICA and then localize independent components of interest.

However, I sometimes have trouble making a decision about what to do.

First, I was wondering whether to perform a dimension reduction before ICA (using PCA). I tried with and without and the results are clearly different but I don't know which to "trust". I have 245 out of 248 channels that are not artifacted so after ICA computation without PCA, I am left with 245 independent components. The thing is I have many frontal components that correspond to eye movements (according to their topography and rare and abrupt increases in amplitude) : components 1,2,3, 6, 7, 11... and more. Their topography look almost exactly the same. I don't know how to interpret it. Even when I perform PCA (100 components) before ICA, I am left with several eye movement artefacts but not that many.

Could it be a problem with the raw data, due to movements during the experiment ? The machine said the subject barely moved though...

Given that I am using ICA for an other purpose than artifact removal, is it actually a problem to have so many frontal artifacts?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hi and welcome here. The nature of your question is very specific to neurophisology recorded with MEG. This site here focues more on general problems regarding signal processing. I would recommend you to use the support of fieldtrip or eeglab for your question. $\endgroup$ Aug 25 at 5:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.