Estimating Mutual Information and Pearson Correlation on Neural Evoked Responses.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Anni Hukari, Silvia Federica Cotroneo, Riitta Salmelin
{"title":"Estimating Mutual Information and Pearson Correlation on Neural Evoked Responses.","authors":"Anni Hukari, Silvia Federica Cotroneo, Riitta Salmelin","doi":"10.1007/s12021-026-09784-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In neural evoked responses, small variations in the timing or duration of responses can be observed when the same functional response is recorded in different trials, different experimental conditions or by different sensors. These variations limit the ability of correlation-based methods to detect similarities between signals. Mutual information (MI) provides an alternative similarity measure, capable of capturing both linear and non-linear dependencies, yet its practical use is hindered by lack of consensus on estimators for continuous data and the limited understanding of the behavior of the estimators on realistic signals. In this work, we investigate how to estimate the similarity of neural evoked responses by systematically comparing sample Pearson correlation with three of the most common MI estimators. We describe their behavior using both simulated signals and real magnetoencephalographic data. In the simulations, the estimators are tested against a set of transformations that depict realistic changes in neural evoked responses. Subsequently, we propose guidelines for defining adaptive lower bounds on the similarity estimates and analyzing the similarity rankings induced by the different estimators. Our findings reveal trade-offs between measures sensitivity and different signal properties. We confirm that Pearson correlation is reliable in describing linear relationships for low-noise signals, and we identify parameter settings that stabilize MI estimators, enabling them to capture complex signal dependencies. Together, these results introduce practical parameter choices and thresholding strategies for mutual information and provide guidance for selecting and interpreting similarity measures in the analysis of neural evoked time series.</p>","PeriodicalId":49761,"journal":{"name":"Neuroinformatics","volume":"24 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582061/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12021-026-09784-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In neural evoked responses, small variations in the timing or duration of responses can be observed when the same functional response is recorded in different trials, different experimental conditions or by different sensors. These variations limit the ability of correlation-based methods to detect similarities between signals. Mutual information (MI) provides an alternative similarity measure, capable of capturing both linear and non-linear dependencies, yet its practical use is hindered by lack of consensus on estimators for continuous data and the limited understanding of the behavior of the estimators on realistic signals. In this work, we investigate how to estimate the similarity of neural evoked responses by systematically comparing sample Pearson correlation with three of the most common MI estimators. We describe their behavior using both simulated signals and real magnetoencephalographic data. In the simulations, the estimators are tested against a set of transformations that depict realistic changes in neural evoked responses. Subsequently, we propose guidelines for defining adaptive lower bounds on the similarity estimates and analyzing the similarity rankings induced by the different estimators. Our findings reveal trade-offs between measures sensitivity and different signal properties. We confirm that Pearson correlation is reliable in describing linear relationships for low-noise signals, and we identify parameter settings that stabilize MI estimators, enabling them to capture complex signal dependencies. Together, these results introduce practical parameter choices and thresholding strategies for mutual information and provide guidance for selecting and interpreting similarity measures in the analysis of neural evoked time series.

神经诱发反应的互信息估计和Pearson相关。
在神经诱发反应中,当在不同的试验、不同的实验条件或不同的传感器记录相同的功能反应时,可以观察到反应的时间或持续时间的微小变化。这些变化限制了基于相关性的方法检测信号之间相似性的能力。互信息(MI)提供了一种替代的相似性度量,能够捕获线性和非线性依赖关系,但是由于对连续数据的估计量缺乏共识以及对实际信号的估计量的行为的有限理解,它的实际使用受到阻碍。在这项工作中,我们研究了如何通过系统地比较样本Pearson相关性与三种最常见的MI估计器来估计神经诱发反应的相似性。我们使用模拟信号和真实脑磁图数据来描述它们的行为。在模拟中,对估计器进行了一系列转换的测试,这些转换描述了神经诱发反应的实际变化。随后,我们提出了定义相似性估计自适应下界的准则,并分析了不同估计量引起的相似性排序。我们的发现揭示了测量灵敏度和不同信号特性之间的权衡。我们确认Pearson相关性在描述低噪声信号的线性关系方面是可靠的,并且我们确定了稳定MI估计器的参数设置,使它们能够捕获复杂的信号依赖关系。总之,这些结果介绍了互信息的实用参数选择和阈值策略,并为神经诱发时间序列分析中相似性度量的选择和解释提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuroinformatics
Neuroinformatics 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
54
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Neuroinformatics publishes original articles and reviews with an emphasis on data structure and software tools related to analysis, modeling, integration, and sharing in all areas of neuroscience research. The editors particularly invite contributions on: (1) Theory and methodology, including discussions on ontologies, modeling approaches, database design, and meta-analyses; (2) Descriptions of developed databases and software tools, and of the methods for their distribution; (3) Relevant experimental results, such as reports accompanie by the release of massive data sets; (4) Computational simulations of models integrating and organizing complex data; and (5) Neuroengineering approaches, including hardware, robotics, and information theory studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书