Granger Causality on Spatial Manifolds: Applications to Neuroimaging

Handbook of Time Series Analysis: Recent Theoretical Developments and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 461-491

  Valdés Sosa, Pedro A ^a   Bornot Sánchez, Jose Miguel ^a   Vega Hernández, Mayrim ^a   Melie García, Lester ^a   Lage Castellanos, Agustin ^a   Canales Rodríguez, Erick ^a  

^a CUBAN NEUROSCIENCE CENTER   (Cuba)

Author keywords

Applications to neuroimaging; Continuous spatial multivariate autoregressive model(sMAR); Estimation via MM algorithm; Evaluation of simulated data; Granger causality; Penalized sMAR; Spatial manifolds; Testing for spatial Granger causality; Time series analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889295131     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9783527609970.ch18     Document Type: Chapter

References (74)

1. K. J. Friston. Functional and effective connectivity in neuroimaging: a synthesis. Hum. Brain Mapping, 2: 56-78, 1994.
2. R. K. Shields, S. Madhavan, K. R. Cole, J. D. Brostad, J. L. DeMeulenaere, C. D. Eggers, and P. H. Otten. Proprioceptive coordination of movement sequences in humans. Clin. Neurophysiol., 116: 87-92, 2005.
3. L. Harrison, W. D. Penny, and K. Friston. Multivariate autoregressive modeling of fMRI time series. Neuroimage, 19:1477-1491, 2003.
4. K. V. Mardia J. T. Kent and J. M. Bibby. Multivariate Analysis. Academic Press, London, San Diego, New York, Boston, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, 1979.
5. C. K. Wikle and N. Cressie. A dimension-reduced approach to space-time kalman filtering. Biometrika, 86: 815-829, 1999.
6. C. W. J. Granger. Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37:414, 1969.
7. S. L. Bressler, M. Z. Ding, and W. M. Yang. Investigation of cooperative cortical dynamics by multivariate autoregressive modeling of event-related local field potentials. Neurocomputing, 26-7: 625-631, 1999.
8. A. Neumaier and T. Schneider. Estimation of parameters and eigenmodes of multivariate autoregressive models. ACM Trans. Math. Softw., 27: 27-57, 2001.
9. T. Schneider and A. Neumaier. Algorithm 808: Arfit -a matlab package for the estimation of parameters and eigenmodes of multivariate autoregressive models. ACM Trans. Math. Softw., 27: 58-65, 2001.
10. R. Dahlhaus. Fitting time series models to nonstationary processes. Ann. Stat., 25: 1-37, 1997.
11. P. A. Valdes. Quantitative electroencepholographic tomography. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., 103:19, 1997.
12. R. I. Goldman, J. M. Stern, J. Engel, and M. S. Cohen. Acquiring simultaneous EEG and functional MRI. Clin. Neurophysiol., 111: 1974-1980, 2000.
13. Eduardo Martinez-Montes, Pedro A. Valdes-Sosa, Fumikazu Miwakeichi, Robin I. Goldman, and Mark S. Cohen. Concurrent EEG/fMRI analysis by multiway partial least squares. Neuroimage, 22: 1023-1034, 2004.
14. F. Miwakeichi, E. Martinez-Montes, P. A. Valdes, N. Nishiyama, H. Mizuhara, and Y. Yamaguchi. Decomposing EEG data into space-time-frequency components using parallel factor analysis. Neuroimage, 22: 1035-1045, 2004.
15. J. O. Ramsay and B. W. Silverman. Functional Data Analysis. Springer, Berlin, 1997.
16. J. F. Geweke. Measurement of linear-dependence and feedback between multiple time-series. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 77: 304-313, 1982.
17. J. F. Geweke. Measures of conditional linear-dependence and feedback between time-series. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 79:907-915, 1984.
18. R. I. Goldman, J. M. Stern, J. Engel, and M. S. Cohen. Simultaneous EEG and fMRI of the alpha rhythm. Neuroreport, 13: 2487-2492, 2002.
19. K. J. Worsley, S. Marrett, P. Neelin, A. C. Vandal, K. J. Friston, and A. C. Evans. A unified statistical approach for determining significant signals in images of cerebral activation. Hum. Brain Mapping, 4: 58-73, 1996.
20. B. Efron. Large-scale simultaneous hypothesis testing: The choice of a null hypothesis. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 99: 96-104, 2004.
21. B. Efron. Selection and estimation for large-scale simultaneous inference. 2005. URL http://www-stat.stanford.edu/people/faculty/efron/papers.html.
22. P. A. Valdes-Sosa. Spatio-temporal autoregressivemodels defined over brain manifolds. Neuroinformatics, 2: 239-250, 2004.
23. P. A. Valdes-Sosa, J. M. Sanchez-Bornot, A. Lage-Castellanos, M. Vega-Hernandez, J. Bosch-Bayard, L. Melie-Garcia, and E. Canales-Rodriguez. Estimating brain functional connectivity with sparse multivariate autoregression. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci., 360: 969-981, 2005.
24. L. A. Baccala,M. A. L. Nicolelis, C. H. Yu, and M. Oshiro. Structural-analysis of neural circuits using the theory of directed-graphs. Comput. Biomed. Res., 24: 7-28, 1991.
25. M. Kaminski, M. Z. Ding, W. A. Truccolo, and S. L. Bressler. Evaluating causal relations in neural systems: Granger causality, directed transfer function and statistical assessment of significance. Biol. Cybern., 85: 145-157, 2001.
26. B. Horwitz. The elusive concept of brain connectivity. Neuroimage, 19:466-470, 2003.
27. A. R. McIntosh and F. Gonzalez-Lima. Structural equation modeling and its applications to network analysis in functional brain imaging. Hum. Brain Mapping, 2: 2-22, 1994.
28. J. Pearl. Graphs, causality, and structural equation models. Sociol. Meth. Res., 27: 226-284, 1998.
29. Y. Hosoya. The decomposition and measurement of the interdependency between 2nd-order stationary-processes. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 88: 429-444, 1991.
30. J. F. Geweke. Measures of conditional linear-dependence and feedback between time-series. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 79:907-915, 1984.
31. C. Bernasconi and P. Konig. On the directionality of cortical interactions studied by structural analysis of electrophysiological recordings. Biol. Cybern., 81: 199-210, 1999.
32. W. Hesse, E. Moller, M. Arnold, and B. Schack. The use of time-variant EEG granger causality for inspecting directed interdependences of neural assemblies. J. Neurosci. Meth., 124: 27-44, 2003.
33. D. R. Brillinger, H. L. Bryant, and J. P. Segundo. Identification of synaptic interactions. Biol. Cybern., 22: 213-228, 1976.
34. J. Pearl. Graphs, causality, and structural equation models. Sociol. Meth. Res., 27: 226-284, 1998.
35. R. Goebel, A. Roebroeck, D. S. Kim, and E. Formisano. Investigating directed cortical interactions in time-resolved fMRI data using vector autoregressive modeling and granger causality mapping. Magn. Reson. Imaging, 21:1251-1261, 2003.
36. M. Eichler. Graphical time series modelling in brain imaging. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, index issue, 2005.
37. J. D. Hamilton. Time Series Analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1999.
38. R. Goebel, T. D. Waberski, H. Simon, E. Peters, F. Klostermann, G. Curio, and H. Buchner. Different origins of low-and high-frequency components (600 Hz) of human somatosensory evoked potentials. Clin. Neurophysiol., 115: 927-937, 2004.
39. D. S. Ruchkin, E. R. John, and J. Villegas. Analysis of average evoked potentials making use of least mean square techniques. Ann. New York Acad. Sci., 115:799, 1964.
40. K. Friston, J. Phillips, D. Chawla, and C. Buchel. Revealing interactions among brain systems with nonlinear pca. Hum. BrainMapping, 8: 92-97, 1999.
41. T. P. Jung, S. Makeig, M. J. McKeown, A. J. Bell, T. W. Lee, and T. J. Sejnowski. Imaging brain dynamics using independent component analysis. Proc. IEEE, 89: 1107-1122, 2001.
42. K. V. Mardia, C. Goodall, E. Redfern, and F. J. Alonso. The kriged kalman filter-rejoinder. Test, 7: 277-285, 1998.
43. J. Q. Fan and R. Z. Li. Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 96:1348-1360, 2001.
44. C. Hilgetag, R. Kotter, and K. E. Stephan. Computational Methods for the Analysis of Brain Connectivity, chapter 14-Hilgetag. Ascoli operator: Network typesetting edition, 2002.
45. R. Kotter, K. E. Stephan, N. Palomero-Gallagher, S. Geyer, A. Schleicher, and K. Zilles. Multimodal characterisation of cortical areas by multivariate analyses of receptor binding and connectivity data. Anat. Embryol., 204: 333-350, 2001.
46. O. Sporns, D. R. Chialvo, M. Kaiser, and C. C. Hilgetag. Organization, development and function of complex brain networks. Trends Cogn. Sci., 8: 418-425, 2004.
47. R. Scheines, P. Spirtes, C. Glymour, C. Meek, and T. Richardson. The tetrad project: Constraint based aids to causal model specification. Multivar. Behav. Res., 33: 65-117, 1998.
48. J. Pearl. Causality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
49. S. Demiralp and K. D. Hoover. Searching for the causal structure of a vector autoregression. Oxford Bull. Econ. Stat., 65: 745-767, 2003.
50. E. I. George and R. E. McCulloch. Approaches for bayesian variable selection. Statistica Sinica, 7: 339-373, 1997.
51. E. I. George. The variable selection problem. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 95: 1304-1308, 2000.
52. A. Dobra, C. Hans, B. Jones, J. R. Nevins, G. A. Yao, and M. West. Sparse graphical models for exploring gene expression data. J. Multivariate Anal., 90: 196-212, 2004.
53. B. Jones and M. West. Covariance decomposition in multivariate analysis. http://ftp.isds.duke.edu/WorkingPapers/04-15.pdf.), 2005.
54. J. Q. Fan and H. Peng. Nonconcave penalized likelihood with a diverging number of parameters. Ann. Stat., 32: 928-961, 2004.
55. Ch. Leng, Y. Lin, and G. Wahba. A note on the LASSO and related procedures in model selection. 2005. URL http://www.stat.wisc.edu/~wahba/ftp1/tr1091rxx.pdf.
56. N. Meinshausen and P. Bühlmann. Consistent neighbourhood selection for sparse high-dimensional graphs with the LASSO. 2004. URL http://stat.ethz.ch/research/.
57. A. E. Hoerl and R. W. Kennard. Ridge regression-biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems. Technometrics, 12:55-67, 1970.
58. M. West. Bayesian factor regression models in the "large p, small n" paradigm. Working Papers of the Institute of Statistics and Decision Science, Duke University, 2002.
59. B. Efron, T. Hastie, I. Johnstone, and R. Tibshirani. Least angle regression. Ann. Stat., 32: 407-451, 2004.
60. P. J. Brown J. E. Griffin. Alternative prior distributions for variable selection with very many more variales than observations. Technical report, Deparment of Satistic, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK, 2005.
61. M. West. On scale mixtures of normal-distributions. Biometrika, 74: 646-648, 1987.
62. R. Tibshirani, M. Saunders, S. Rosset, J. Zhu, and K. Knight. Sparsity and smoothness via the fused LASSO. J. R. Stat. Soc. Series B-Stat. Methodol., 67: 91-108, 2005.
63. R. D. Pascual-Marqui, M. Esslen, K. Kochi, and D. Lehmann. Functional imaging with low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (loreta): A review. Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, 24: 91-95, 2002.
64. H. Zou and T. Hastie. Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. J. R. Statisc. Soc. B, 67: 301-320, 2005.
65. D. R. Hunter. Mm algorithms for generalized bradley-terry models. Ann. Stat., 32: 384-406, 2004.
66. D. R. Hunter and K. Lange. A tutorial on mm algorithms. Am. Stat., 58: 30-37, 2004.
67. D. R. Hunter and R. Li. Variable selection using MM algorithms. Ann. Stat., 33(4):1617-1642, 2005.
68. G. H. Golub, M. Heath, and G. Wahba. Generalized cross-validation as a method for choosing a good ridge parameter. Technometrics, 21: 215-223, 1979.
69. B. Efron. Robbins, empirical bayes and microarrays. Ann. Stat., 31: 366-378, 2003.
70. B. Efron. Bayesians, frequentists, and physicists. 2005. URL http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~brad/papers/physics.pdf.
71. R. J. Carroll, S.Wang, D. G. Simpson, A. J. Stromberg, and D. Ruppert. The sandwich (robust covariance matrix) estimation. Technical Report. Preprint available at http://stat. tamu.edu/ftp/pub/rjcarroll/sandwich.pdf., 1998.
72. P. H. C. Eilers, I. D. Currie, and M. Durban. Fast and compact smoothing on large multidimensional grids. Comput. Stat. Data Anal., 50: 61-76, 2006.
73. C. Buchel and K. Friston. Interactions among neuronal systems assessed with functional neuroimaging. Revue Neurologique, 157: 807-815, 2001.
74. W. A. Freiwald, P. A. Valdes, J. Bosch, R. Biscay, J. C. Jimenez, L. M. Rodriguez, V. Rodriguez, A. K. Kreiter, and W. Singer. Testing non-linearity and directedness of interactions between neural groups in the macaque inferotemporal cortex. J. Neurosci. Meth., 94: 105-119, 1999.