跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.06979 · v1

Uncertainty calibration in Bayesian M/EEG source imaging

首次提交 2026-11-04 21:41
版本更新 2026-11-04 21:41
雷达观测 2026-11-06 10:04
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

M/EEG source imaging requires accurate localization and reliable uncertainty estimates, yet posterior credible regions are rarely assessed for empirical calibration. We present a simulation-based framework for uncertainty quantification and calibration of empirical Bayesian inverse methods with closed-form conditional Gaussian posterior summaries. We compare Bayesian minimum norm (BMN) with sLORETA depth weighting and sparse Bayesian learning (SBL) with sparse basis field expansions (S-FLEX). S-FLEX allows retained coefficients to contribute nonzero marginal posterior variance at locations where voxel-wise SBL yields degenerate variances. For BMN, we derive joint source- and noise-variance updates through evidence maximization. We test whether adaptive noise learning yields near-calibrated uncertainties. Both methods retain residual miscalibration, motivating post-hoc isotonic recalibration of credible-region levels using empirical coverage. Simulations assess fixed- and free-orientation models across signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), source sparsity levels, and subject-specific head models, using oracle, baseline-estimated, and adaptively learned noise. Before recalibration, SBL+S-FLEX yields lower Wasserstein localization error, smaller posterior uncertainty, and coverage closer to nominal credibility than BMN+sLORETA. Isotonic recalibration improves both methods, with larger gains for conservative BMN+sLORETA posteriors; transfer across mismatched SNR, sparsity, and head models remains condition dependent. Noise specifications yield broadly consistent reconstruction and uncertainty trends within each estimator. In real auditory MEG data, SBL+S-FLEX provides more focal localization and tighter uncertainties than BMN+sLORETA, suggesting greater statistical power for identifying bilateral auditory sources.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 21:41 · 最新观测版本

Uncertainty calibration in Bayesian M/EEG source imaging

M/EEG source imaging requires accurate localization and reliable uncertainty estimates, yet posterior credible regions are rarely assessed for empirical calibration. We present a simulation-based framework for uncertainty quantification and calibration of empirical Bayesian inverse methods with closed-form conditional Gaussian posterior summaries. We compare Bayesian minimum norm (BMN) with sLORETA depth weighting and sparse Bayesian learning (SBL) with sparse basis field expansions (S-FLEX). S-FLEX allows retained coefficients to contribute nonzero marginal posterior variance at locations where voxel-wise SBL yields degenerate variances. For BMN, we derive joint source- and noise-variance updates through evidence maximization. We test whether adaptive noise learning yields near-calibrated uncertainties. Both methods retain residual miscalibration, motivating post-hoc isotonic recalibration of credible-region levels using empirical coverage. Simulations assess fixed- and free-orientation models across signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), source sparsity levels, and subject-specific head models, using oracle, baseline-estimated, and adaptively learned noise. Before recalibration, SBL+S-FLEX yields lower Wasserstein localization error, smaller posterior uncertainty, and coverage closer to nominal credibility than BMN+sLORETA. Isotonic recalibration improves both methods, with larger gains for conservative BMN+sLORETA posteriors; transfer across mismatched SNR, sparsity, and head models remains condition dependent. Noise specifications yield broadly consistent reconstruction and uncertainty trends within each estimator. In real auditory MEG data, SBL+S-FLEX provides more focal localization and tighter uncertainties than BMN+sLORETA, suggesting greater statistical power for identifying bilateral auditory sources.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗