Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35492077›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2022

Time-Frequency Representations of Brain Oscillations: Which One Is Better?

Harald Bârzan, Ana-Maria Ichim, Vasile Vlad Moca, Raul Cristian Mureşan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Harald BârzanDepartment of Theoretical and Experimental Neuroscience, Transylvanian Institute of Neuroscience, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Ana-Maria IchimDepartment of Theoretical and Experimental Neuroscience, Transylvanian Institute of Neuroscience, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Vasile Vlad MocaDepartment of Theoretical and Experimental Neuroscience, Transylvanian Institute of Neuroscience, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Raul Cristian MureşanDepartment of Theoretical and Experimental Neuroscience, Transylvanian Institute of Neuroscience, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain oscillations are thought to subserve important functions by organizing the dynamical landscape of neural circuits. The expression of such oscillations in neural signals is usually evaluated using time-frequency representations (TFR), which resolve oscillatory processes in both time and frequency. While a vast number of methods exist to compute TFRs, there is often no objective criterion to decide which one is better. In feature-rich data, such as that recorded from the brain, sources of noise and unrelated processes abound and contaminate results. The impact of these distractor sources is especially problematic, such that TFRs that are more robust to contaminants are expected to provide more useful representations. In addition, the minutiae of the techniques themselves impart better or worse time and frequency resolutions, which also influence the usefulness of the TFRs. Here, we introduce a methodology to evaluate the "quality" of TFRs of neural signals by quantifying how much information they retain about the experimental condition during visual stimulation and recognition tasks, in mice and humans, respectively. We used machine learning to discriminate between various experimental conditions based on TFRs computed with different methods. We found that various methods provide more or less informative TFRs depending on the characteristics of the data. In general, however, more advanced techniques, such as the superlet transform, seem to provide better results for complex time-frequency landscapes, such as those extracted from electroencephalography signals. Finally, we introduce a method based on feature perturbation that is able to quantify how much time-frequency components contribute to the correct discrimination among experimental conditions. The methodology introduced in the present study may be extended to other analyses of neural data, enabling the discovery of data features that are modulated by the experimental manipulation.

Indexed as

electroencephalographyexplainable AImachine learningneural oscillationsneurophysiologytime-frequency representation

Identifiers

PMID35492077
PMCPMC9050353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.