Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37751054›Full record

ReviewBrain topography2024

Complexity Measures for EEG Microstate Sequences: Concepts and Algorithms.

Frederic von Wegner, Milena Wiemers, Gesine Hermann, Inken Tödt, Enzo Tagliazucchi, Helmut Laufs

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain topography, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Cognitive Processing and EEG Complexity.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Frederic von WegnerSchool of Biomedical Sciences, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Wallace Wurth, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia. f.vonwegner@unsw.edu.au.
Milena WiemersDepartment of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Lüneburg Hospital, Bögelstrasse 1, 21339, Lüneburg, Germany.
Gesine HermannDepartment of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts University, Arnold-Heller-Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Inken TödtInstitute of Sexual Medicine & Forensic Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Christian-Albrechts University, Schwanenweg 24, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Enzo TagliazucchiDepartment of Physics, University of Buenos Aires, 1428, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Helmut LaufsDepartment of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts University, Arnold-Heller-Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 440536202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

EEG microstate sequence analysis quantifies properties of ongoing brain electrical activity which is known to exhibit complex dynamics across many time scales. In this report we review recent developments in quantifying microstate sequence complexity, we classify these approaches with regard to different complexity concepts, and we evaluate excess entropy as a yet unexplored quantity in microstate research. We determined the quantities entropy rate, excess entropy, Lempel-Ziv complexity (LZC), and Hurst exponents on Potts model data, a discrete statistical mechanics model with a temperature-controlled phase transition. We then applied the same techniques to EEG microstate sequences from wakefulness and non-REM sleep stages and used first-order Markov surrogate data to determine which time scales contributed to the different complexity measures. We demonstrate that entropy rate and LZC measure the Kolmogorov complexity (randomness) of microstate sequences, whereas excess entropy and Hurst exponents describe statistical complexity which attains its maximum at intermediate levels of randomness. We confirmed the equivalence of entropy rate and LZC when the LZ-76 algorithm is used, a result previously reported for neural spike train analysis (Amigó et al., Neural Comput 16:717-736, https://doi.org/10.1162/089976604322860677 , 2004). Surrogate data analyses prove that entropy-based quantities and LZC focus on short-range temporal correlations, whereas Hurst exponents include short and long time scales. Sleep data analysis reveals that deeper sleep stages are accompanied by a decrease in Kolmogorov complexity and an increase in statistical complexity. Microstate jump sequences, where duplicate states have been removed, show higher randomness, lower statistical complexity, and no long-range correlations. Regarding the practical use of these methods, we suggest that LZC can be used as an efficient entropy rate estimator that avoids the estimation of joint entropies, whereas entropy rate estimation via joint entropies has the advantage of providing excess entropy as the second parameter of the same linear fit. We conclude that metrics of statistical complexity are a useful addition to microstate analysis and address a complexity concept that is not yet covered by existing microstate algorithms while being actively explored in other areas of brain research.

Indexed as

BrainElectroencephalographyAlgorithmsBrain MappingHumansSleepComplexityEEG microstatesElectroencephalographyEntropyHurst exponentMarkov models

Identifiers

PMID37751054
PMCPMC10884068

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.