Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev

Published in International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences (Volume 2, Issue 1)

Received: 23 January 2017 Accepted: 8 February 2017 Published: 1 March 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The problem to find an optimal EEG reference is the actual topic for discussion over 60 years. We have studied topographical differences in averaged EEG amplitudes of alpha domain recorded in 10–20 system during “eyes closed” test. These differences appeared due to the use of 13 reference schemes: top and bottom of the chin (Ch1, Ch2); nose (N); top and bottom of the neck (Nc1, Nc2); upper back (Bc); united electrodes at the base of the neck anteriorly and posteriorly (2Nc); united, ipsilateral, and individual ear electrodes (A12, Sym, A1, A2); vertex (Cz); and averaged reference (AR). Six experiments for each of the ten subjects were carried out with grounded and ungrounded states of three distant basic references Ch2, Bc, 2Nc. Pairwise comparisons of topographic consistency of 13 reference schemes were carried out on the proposed complex of three independent indicators with the evaluative criterion, followed by centroid-based clustering of the reference schemes and its discriminant verification. As a result, we have established: (1) that most coordinated topography is provided by the following reference electrodes —A12, Ch1, Ch2, Sym; (2) reference electrodes A1, Nc2, A2, Sh1, AR, Cz are characterized by individually varying topography, which may lead to contradictory conclusions obtained when they are used; (3) no significant reasons have been found for preferring the grounded (neutral) states of reference electrodes, that makes less important the search for or mathematical construct of an infinitely remote neutral reference electrode; (4) numerous distortions of EEG topography by reference electrode standardization technique (REST) raise serious doubts about its proclaimed advantages in EEG studies.

Published in	International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences (Volume 2, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
Page(s)	18-27
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

EEG, Reference Electrode, Reference at Infinity, Neutral Reference, REST Reference Electrode Standardization Technique

References

[1]	Adrian E. D., Matthews B. H. (1934) The Berger rhythm: potential changes from the occipital lobes in man. Brain. 57: 355–385.
[2]	Alhaddad M. J. (2012) Common Average Reference (CAR) Improves P300 Speller. Int J Eng Technol. 2 (3): 451–463.
[3]	Berger H. (1929) Uber das Elektroenkephalogramm des Menschen. Archiv fur Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten. 87: 527–570.
[4]	Carvalhaes C. G., Suppes P. (2011) A spline framework for estimating the EEG surface Laplacian using the Euclidean metric. Neural Comput. 23 (11): 2974–3000.
[5]	Desmedt J. E., Chalklin V., Tomberg C. (1990) Emulation of somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) components with the 3-shell head model and the problem of ‘ghost’ potential fields’ when using an average reference in brain mapping. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 77 (4): 243–258.
[6]	Essl M., Rappelsberger P. (1998) EEG coherence and reference signals: experimental results and mathematical explanations. Med Biol Eng Comput. 36 (4): 399–406.
[7]	Fingelkurts A., Fingelkurts A., Krause C., Kaplan A., Borisov S., Sams M. (2003) Structural (operational) synchrony of EEG alpha activity during an auditory memory task. Neuroimage. 20 (1): 529–542.
[8]	Hagemann D., Naumann E., Thayer J. F. (2001) The quest for the EEG reference revisited: A glance from brain asymmetry research. Psychophysiol. 38 (5): 847–857.
[9]	Hjorth B. (1975) An on-line transformation of EEG scalp potentials into orthogonal source derivations. Electroencephal. and Clin Neurophysiol. 39 (5): 526–530.
[10]	Hu S., Cao Y., Chen S., Kong W., Zhang J., Li X., Zhang Y. (2012) Independence Verification for Reference Signal under Neck of Human Body in EEG Recordings. Proc 31-th Chinese Control Conf. Hefei. 4038–4042.
[11]	Hu S., Cao Y., Chen S., Zhang J., Kong W., Yang K., et al. (2012) A comparative study of two reference estimation methods in EEG recording. Proc Brain Inspir Cogn Syst. 321–328.
[12]	Geselowitz D. B. (1998) The zero of potential. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 17 (1): 128–132.
[13]	James C. J., Whesse C. (2005) Independent component analysis for biomedical signals. Physiol Meas. 26: R15–39.
[14]	Jasper H. H. (1958) The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol. 10: 371–375.
[15]	Kayser J., Tenke C. E. (2010) In search of the Rosetta Stone for scalp EEG: Converging on reference-free techniques. Clin Neurophysiol. 121 (12): 1973–1975.
[16]	Klecka W. R. (1980). Discriminant Analysis. SAGE Publications. 72 pp.
[17]	Kulaichev A. P. (2011) The method of correlation analysis of EEG synchronism and its possibilities. Zh Vyssh Nerv Deiat Im I P Pavlova. 61 (4): 1–14.
[18]	Kulaichev A. P., Gorbachevskaya N. L. (2013) Differentiation of Norm and Disorders of Schizophrenic Spectrum by Analysis of EEG Correlation Synchrony. J Exp Integr Med. 3 (4): 267–278.
[19]	Lepage K. Q., Kramer M. A., Chu C. J. (2014) A statistically robust EEG re-referencing procedure to mitigate reference effect. J Neurosci Methods. 235 (30): 101–116.
[20]	Madhu N., Ranta R., Maillard L., Koessler L. A. (2012) Unified treatment of the reference estimation problem in depth EEG recordings. Med Biol Eng Comput: 50 (10): 1003–1015.
[21]	Marzett L., Nolte G., Perrucci M. G., Romani G. L., Del Gratta C. (2007) The use of standardized infinity reference in EEG coherency studies. Neuroimage. 36 (1): 48–63.
[22]	Ng S. C., Raveendran P. (2007) Comparison of different Montages on to EEG classification. Biomed 06, IFMBE Proceedings 15, 365–368.
[23]	Nunez P. L. (1981) Electric fields of the brain: the neurophysics of EEG. Oxford Univ. Press. NY. 640 pp.
[24]	Pascual-Marqui R. D., Lehmann D. (1993) Topographic maps, source localization inference, and the reference electrode. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 88 (6): 532–536.
[25]	Perrin F., Pernier J., Bertrand O., Echallier J. F. (1989) Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 72 (2): 184–187.
[26]	Qin Y., Xu P., Yao D. (2010) A comparative study of different references for EEG default mode network: the use of the infinity reference. Clin. Neurophysiol. 121 (12): 1981–1991.
[27]	Schiff S. J. (2006) Dangerous Phase, Neuroinformatics. 3 (4): 315–318.
[28]	Stephenson W. A., Gibbs F. A. (1951) A balanced non-cephalic reference electrode. EEG Clin. Neurophysiol. 3: 237–240.
[29]	Tenke C. E., Kayser J. (2005) Reference-free quantification of EEG spectra: Combining current source density (CSD) and frequency principal components analysis (fPCA). Clin Neurophysiol. 116 (12): 2826–2846.
[30]	Teplan M. (2002) Fundamentals of EEG measurement. Meas Sci Rev. v. 2, sect. 2: 1–11.
[31]	Wang B., Wang X., Ikeda A., Nagamin T., Shibasaki H., Nakamuraea M. (2014) Automatic reference selection for quantitative EEG interpretation: Identification of diffuse/localised activity and the active ear lobe reference, iterative detection of the distribution of EEG rhythms. Med Eng Phys. 36 (1): 88– 95.
[32]	Wolpaw J. R., Wood C. C. (1982) Scalp distribution of human auditory evoked potentials. Evaluation of reference electrode sites. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol. 54 (1): 15–24.
[33]	Yao (2001) A method to standardize a reference of scalp EEG recordings to a point at infinity. Physiol Meas. 22 (4): 693–711.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. (2017). Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. Int. J. Psychol. Brain Sci. 2017, 2(1), 18-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. Int J Psychol Brain Sci. 2017;2(1):18-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13,
  author = {Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev},
  title = {Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies},
  journal = {International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {18-27},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  abstract = {The problem to find an optimal EEG reference is the actual topic for discussion over 60 years. We have studied topographical differences in averaged EEG amplitudes of alpha domain recorded in 10–20 system during “eyes closed” test. These differences appeared due to the use of 13 reference schemes: top and bottom of the chin (Ch1, Ch2); nose (N); top and bottom of the neck (Nc1, Nc2); upper back (Bc); united electrodes at the base of the neck anteriorly and posteriorly (2Nc); united, ipsilateral, and individual ear electrodes (A12, Sym, A1, A2); vertex (Cz); and averaged reference (AR). Six experiments for each of the ten subjects were carried out with grounded and ungrounded states of three distant basic references Ch2, Bc, 2Nc. Pairwise comparisons of topographic consistency of 13 reference schemes were carried out on the proposed complex of three independent indicators with the evaluative criterion, followed by centroid-based clustering of the reference schemes and its discriminant verification. As a result, we have established: (1) that most coordinated topography is provided by the following reference electrodes —A12, Ch1, Ch2, Sym; (2) reference electrodes A1, Nc2, A2, Sh1, AR, Cz are characterized by individually varying topography, which may lead to contradictory conclusions obtained when they are used; (3) no significant reasons have been found for preferring the grounded (neutral) states of reference electrodes, that makes less important the search for or mathematical construct of an infinitely remote neutral reference electrode; (4) numerous distortions of EEG topography by reference electrode standardization technique (REST) raise serious doubts about its proclaimed advantages in EEG studies.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies
AU  - Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev
Y1  - 2017/03/01
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
T2  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
JF  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
JO  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
SP  - 18
EP  - 27
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1573
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
AB  - The problem to find an optimal EEG reference is the actual topic for discussion over 60 years. We have studied topographical differences in averaged EEG amplitudes of alpha domain recorded in 10–20 system during “eyes closed” test. These differences appeared due to the use of 13 reference schemes: top and bottom of the chin (Ch1, Ch2); nose (N); top and bottom of the neck (Nc1, Nc2); upper back (Bc); united electrodes at the base of the neck anteriorly and posteriorly (2Nc); united, ipsilateral, and individual ear electrodes (A12, Sym, A1, A2); vertex (Cz); and averaged reference (AR). Six experiments for each of the ten subjects were carried out with grounded and ungrounded states of three distant basic references Ch2, Bc, 2Nc. Pairwise comparisons of topographic consistency of 13 reference schemes were carried out on the proposed complex of three independent indicators with the evaluative criterion, followed by centroid-based clustering of the reference schemes and its discriminant verification. As a result, we have established: (1) that most coordinated topography is provided by the following reference electrodes —A12, Ch1, Ch2, Sym; (2) reference electrodes A1, Nc2, A2, Sh1, AR, Cz are characterized by individually varying topography, which may lead to contradictory conclusions obtained when they are used; (3) no significant reasons have been found for preferring the grounded (neutral) states of reference electrodes, that makes less important the search for or mathematical construct of an infinitely remote neutral reference electrode; (4) numerous distortions of EEG topography by reference electrode standardization technique (REST) raise serious doubts about its proclaimed advantages in EEG studies.
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev

Department of Biological Science, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. (2017). Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. Int. J. Psychol. Brain Sci. 2017, 2(1), 18-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev. Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies. Int J Psychol Brain Sci. 2017;2(1):18-27. doi: 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13,
  author = {Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev},
  title = {Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies},
  journal = {International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {18-27},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijpbs.20170201.13},
  abstract = {The problem to find an optimal EEG reference is the actual topic for discussion over 60 years. We have studied topographical differences in averaged EEG amplitudes of alpha domain recorded in 10–20 system during “eyes closed” test. These differences appeared due to the use of 13 reference schemes: top and bottom of the chin (Ch1, Ch2); nose (N); top and bottom of the neck (Nc1, Nc2); upper back (Bc); united electrodes at the base of the neck anteriorly and posteriorly (2Nc); united, ipsilateral, and individual ear electrodes (A12, Sym, A1, A2); vertex (Cz); and averaged reference (AR). Six experiments for each of the ten subjects were carried out with grounded and ungrounded states of three distant basic references Ch2, Bc, 2Nc. Pairwise comparisons of topographic consistency of 13 reference schemes were carried out on the proposed complex of three independent indicators with the evaluative criterion, followed by centroid-based clustering of the reference schemes and its discriminant verification. As a result, we have established: (1) that most coordinated topography is provided by the following reference electrodes —A12, Ch1, Ch2, Sym; (2) reference electrodes A1, Nc2, A2, Sh1, AR, Cz are characterized by individually varying topography, which may lead to contradictory conclusions obtained when they are used; (3) no significant reasons have been found for preferring the grounded (neutral) states of reference electrodes, that makes less important the search for or mathematical construct of an infinitely remote neutral reference electrode; (4) numerous distortions of EEG topography by reference electrode standardization technique (REST) raise serious doubts about its proclaimed advantages in EEG studies.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Comparsion of Real EEG References with and Without Zero Potential According Resulting Topograthy Differencies
AU  - Alexey Pavlovich Kulaichev
Y1  - 2017/03/01
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
T2  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
JF  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
JO  - International Journal of Psychological and Brain Sciences
SP  - 18
EP  - 27
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1573
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijpbs.20170201.13
AB  - The problem to find an optimal EEG reference is the actual topic for discussion over 60 years. We have studied topographical differences in averaged EEG amplitudes of alpha domain recorded in 10–20 system during “eyes closed” test. These differences appeared due to the use of 13 reference schemes: top and bottom of the chin (Ch1, Ch2); nose (N); top and bottom of the neck (Nc1, Nc2); upper back (Bc); united electrodes at the base of the neck anteriorly and posteriorly (2Nc); united, ipsilateral, and individual ear electrodes (A12, Sym, A1, A2); vertex (Cz); and averaged reference (AR). Six experiments for each of the ten subjects were carried out with grounded and ungrounded states of three distant basic references Ch2, Bc, 2Nc. Pairwise comparisons of topographic consistency of 13 reference schemes were carried out on the proposed complex of three independent indicators with the evaluative criterion, followed by centroid-based clustering of the reference schemes and its discriminant verification. As a result, we have established: (1) that most coordinated topography is provided by the following reference electrodes —A12, Ch1, Ch2, Sym; (2) reference electrodes A1, Nc2, A2, Sh1, AR, Cz are characterized by individually varying topography, which may lead to contradictory conclusions obtained when they are used; (3) no significant reasons have been found for preferring the grounded (neutral) states of reference electrodes, that makes less important the search for or mathematical construct of an infinitely remote neutral reference electrode; (4) numerous distortions of EEG topography by reference electrode standardization technique (REST) raise serious doubts about its proclaimed advantages in EEG studies.
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download