Volume 12 Supplement 1
Modeling habituation of auditory evoked fields using neural mass models
© Wang and Knösche; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
Published: 18 July 2011
With our habituation model we were able to fit the auditory N100 component and its decreasing amplitude during receptive stimulation. With this simple model, we were not able to account for the later components. The noise had a strong effect on the later components and in order to keep the balance between the model complexity and the fitting we chose only two columns to model the whole ERP. However, our model can be easily expanded to explain details such as P200, P300 etc., by using more NMMs, if more or better quality data are available.
- Rosburg T, Trautner P, Boutros NN, Korzyukov OA, Schaller C, Elger CE, Kurthen M: Habituation of auditory evoked potentials in intracranial and extracranial recordings. Psychophysiology. 2006, 432: 137-144. 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00391.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bear MF, Connors BW, Paradiso MA: Neuroscience: Exploring the brain. 2007, Lippincott Williams & WilkinsGoogle Scholar
- David O, Harrison L, Friston K: Modelling event-related responses in the brain. Neuroimage. 2005, 25: 756-770. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.030.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Friston K, Glaser D, Henson R, Kiebel S, Phillips C, Ashburner J: Classical and Bayesian inference in neuroimaging: applications. Neuroimage. 2002, 16: 484-512. 10.1006/nimg.2002.1091.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Malmivu J, Plonse R: Bioelectromagnetism–Principles and Applications of Bioelectric and Biomagnetic Fields. 1995, Oxford University PressView ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.