Abstract
We describe a method for using a generic head model, in the form of an anatomical atlas, to produce EEG source localizations. The atlas is fitted to the subject by a nonrigid warp using a set of surface landmarks. The warped atlas is used to compute a finite element model (FEM) of the forward mapping or lead‐fields between neural current generators and the EEG electrodes. These lead‐fields are used to localize current sources from the subject's EEG data and the sources are then mapped back to the anatomical atlas. This approach provides a mechanism for comparing source localizations across subjects in an atlas‐based coordinate system, which can be used in the large fraction of EEG studies in which MR images are not available. The Montreal brain atlas was used as the reference anatomical atlas and 10 individual MR volumes were used to evaluate the method. The atlas was fitted to each subject's head by a thin‐plate‐spline (TPS) warp. The spatial locations of a generic 155‐electrode configuration were used to constrain the warp. For the purposes of evaluation, dipolar sources were placed on the inner cortical surface in the atlas geometry and transferred to each subject's brain space using a polynomial warp. The parameters of the warp were computed using an intensity‐based matching of the atlas and subject brains, thus ensuring that the sources were placed at approximately the same anatomical location in each case. Data were simulated in the subject geometry and a dipole fit was performed on these data using an FEM of the TPS warped atlas. The source positions found in the warped atlas were transferred back to the original atlas and compared to the original position. Sources were simulated at 972 locations evenly distributed over the inner cortical surface of the atlas. The mean error over all 10 subjects was 8.1 mm in the subject space and 15.2 mm in the atlas space. In comparison, using an affine transformation of the electrodes into atlas space and an FEM model generated from the atlas produced mean errors of 22.3 mm in subject space and 19.6 mm in atlas space. With a standard three‐shell spherical model the errors were 27.2 mm in the subject space and 34.7 mm when mapped to atlas space. Hum Brain Mapp, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.