Source analysis of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data requires the computation of the magnetic fields induced by current sources in the brain. This so-called MEG forward problem includes an accurate estimation of the volume conduction effects in the human head. Here, we introduce the Cut finite element method (CutFEM) for the MEG forward problem. CutFEM\'s meshing process imposes fewer restrictions on tissue anatomy than tetrahedral meshes while being able to mesh curved geometries contrary to hexahedral meshing. To evaluate the new approach, we compare CutFEM with a boundary element method (BEM) that distinguishes three tissue compartments and a 6-compartment hexahedral FEM in an n = 19 group study of somatosensory evoked fields (SEF). The neural generators of the 20 ms post-stimulus SEF components (M20) are reconstructed using both an unregularized and a regularized inversion approach. Changing the forward model resulted in reconstruction differences of about 1 centimeter in location and considerable differences in orientation. The tested 6-compartment FEM approaches significantly increase the goodness of fit to the measured data compared with the 3-compartment BEM. They also demonstrate higher quasi-radial contributions for sources below the gyral crowns. Furthermore, CutFEM improves source separability compared with both other approaches. We conclude that head models with 6 compartments rather than 3 and the new CutFEM approach are valuable additions to MEG source reconstruction, in particular for sources that are predominantly radial.

UNASSIGNED: Source analysis of Electroencephalography (EEG) data requires the computation of the scalp potential induced by current sources in the brain. This so-called EEG forward problem is based on an accurate estimation of the volume conduction effects in the human head, represented by a partial differential equation which can be solved using the finite element method (FEM). FEM offers flexibility when modeling anisotropic tissue conductivities but requires a volumetric discretization, a mesh, of the head domain. Structured hexahedral meshes are easy to create in an automatic fashion, while tetrahedral meshes are better suited to model curved geometries. Tetrahedral meshes, thus, offer better accuracy but are more difficult to create.
UNASSIGNED: We introduce CutFEM for EEG forward simulations to integrate the strengths of hexahedra and tetrahedra. It belongs to the family of unfitted finite element methods, decoupling mesh and geometry representation. Following a description of the method, we will employ CutFEM in both controlled spherical scenarios and the reconstruction of somatosensory-evoked potentials.
UNASSIGNED: CutFEM outperforms competing FEM approaches with regard to numerical accuracy, memory consumption, and computational speed while being able to mesh arbitrarily touching compartments.
UNASSIGNED: CutFEM balances numerical accuracy, computational efficiency, and a smooth approximation of complex geometries that has previously not been available in FEM-based EEG forward modeling.

Transcranial brain stimulation (TBS) has been established as a method for modulating and mapping the function of the human brain, and as a potential treatment tool in several brain disorders. Typically, the stimulation is applied using a one-size-fits-all approach with predetermined locations for the electrodes, in electric stimulation (TES), or the coil, in magnetic stimulation (TMS), which disregards anatomical variability between individuals. However, the induced electric field distribution in the head largely depends on anatomical features implying the need for individually tailored stimulation protocols for focal dosing. This requires detailed models of the individual head anatomy, combined with electric field simulations, to find an optimal stimulation protocol for a given cortical target. Considering the anatomical and functional complexity of different brain disorders and pathologies, it is crucial to account for the anatomical variability in order to translate TBS from a research tool into a viable option for treatment. In this article we present a new method, called CHARM, for automated segmentation of fifteen different head tissues from magnetic resonance (MR) scans. The new method compares favorably to two freely available software tools on a five-tissue segmentation task, while obtaining reasonable segmentation accuracy over all fifteen tissues. The method automatically adapts to variability in the input scans and can thus be directly applied to clinical or research scans acquired with different scanners, sequences or settings. We show that an increase in automated segmentation accuracy results in a lower relative error in electric field simulations when compared to anatomical head models constructed from reference segmentations. However, also the improved segmentations and, by implication, the electric field simulations are affected by systematic artifacts in the input MR scans. As long as the artifacts are unaccounted for, this can lead to local simulation differences up to 30% of the peak field strength on reference simulations. Finally, we exemplarily demonstrate the effect of including all fifteen tissue classes in the field simulations against the standard approach of using only five tissue classes and show that for specific stimulation configurations the local differences can reach 10% of the peak field strength.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) plays an important role in treatment of mental and neurological illnesses, and neurosurgery. However, it is difficult to target specific brain regions accurately because the complex anatomy of the brain substantially affects the shape and strength of the electric fields induced by the TMS coil. A volume conductor model can be used for determining the accurate electric fields; however, the construction of subject-specific anatomical head structures is time-consuming.
The aim of this study is to propose a method to estimate electric fields induced by TMS from only T1 magnetic resonance (MR) images, without constructing a subject-specific anatomical model.
Very large sets of electric fields in the brain of subject-specific anatomical models, which are constructed from T1 and T2 MR images, are computed by a volume conductor model. The relation between electric field distribution and T1 MR images is used for machine learning. Deep neural network (DNN) models are applied for the first time to electric field estimation.
By determining the relationships between the T1 MR images and electric fields by DNN models, the process of electric field estimation is markedly accelerated (to 0.03 s) due to the absence of a requirement for anatomical head structure reconstruction and volume conductor computation. Validation shows promising estimation accuracy, and rapid computations of the DNN model are apt for practical applications.
The study showed that the DNN model can estimate the electric fields from only T1 MR images and requires low computation time, suggesting the possibility of using machine learning for real-time electric field estimation in navigated TMS.

BACKGROUND: Accurately solving the electroencephalography (EEG) forward problem is crucial for precise EEG source analysis. Previous studies have shown that the use of multicompartment head models in combination with the finite element method (FEM) can yield high accuracies both numerically and with regard to the geometrical approximation of the human head. However, the workload for the generation of multicompartment head models has often been too high and the use of publicly available FEM implementations too complicated for a wider application of FEM in research studies. In this paper, we present a MATLAB-based pipeline that aims to resolve this lack of easy-to-use integrated software solutions. The presented pipeline allows for the easy application of five-compartment head models with the FEM within the FieldTrip toolbox for EEG source analysis.
METHODS: The FEM from the SimBio toolbox, more specifically the St. Venant approach, was integrated into the FieldTrip toolbox. We give a short sketch of the implementation and its application, and we perform a source localization of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) using this pipeline. We then evaluate the accuracy that can be achieved using the automatically generated five-compartment hexahedral head model [skin, skull, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), gray matter, white matter] in comparison to a highly accurate tetrahedral head model that was generated on the basis of a semiautomatic segmentation with very careful and time-consuming manual corrections.
RESULTS: The source analysis of the SEP data correctly localizes the P20 component and achieves a high goodness of fit. The subsequent comparison to the highly detailed tetrahedral head model shows that the automatically generated five-compartment head model performs about as well as a highly detailed four-compartment head model (skin, skull, CSF, brain). This is a significant improvement in comparison to a three-compartment head model, which is frequently used in praxis, since the importance of modeling the CSF compartment has been shown in a variety of studies.
CONCLUSIONS: The presented pipeline facilitates the use of five-compartment head models with the FEM for EEG source analysis. The accuracy with which the EEG forward problem can thereby be solved is increased compared to the commonly used three-compartment head models, and more reliable EEG source reconstruction results can be obtained.

For accurate EEG/MEG source analysis it is necessary to model the head volume conductor as realistic as possible. This includes the distinction of the different conductive compartments in the human head. In this study, we investigated the influence of modeling/not modeling the conductive compartments skull spongiosa, skull compacta, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), gray matter, and white matter and of the inclusion of white matter anisotropy on the EEG/MEG forward solution. Therefore, we created a highly realistic 6-compartment head model with white matter anisotropy and used a state-of-the-art finite element approach. Starting from a 3-compartment scenario (skin, skull, and brain), we subsequently refined our head model by distinguishing one further of the above-mentioned compartments. For each of the generated five head models, we measured the effect on the signal topography and signal magnitude both in relation to a highly resolved reference model and to the model generated in the previous refinement step. We evaluated the results of these simulations using a variety of visualization methods, allowing us to gain a general overview of effect strength, of the most important source parameters triggering these effects, and of the most affected brain regions. Thereby, starting from the 3-compartment approach, we identified the most important additional refinement steps in head volume conductor modeling. We were able to show that the inclusion of the highly conductive CSF compartment, whose conductivity value is well known, has the strongest influence on both signal topography and magnitude in both modalities. We found the effect of gray/white matter distinction to be nearly as big as that of the CSF inclusion, and for both of these steps we identified a clear pattern in the spatial distribution of effects. In comparison to these two steps, the introduction of white matter anisotropy led to a clearly weaker, but still strong, effect. Finally, the distinction between skull spongiosa and compacta caused the weakest effects in both modalities when using an optimized conductivity value for the homogenized compartment. We conclude that it is highly recommendable to include the CSF and distinguish between gray and white matter in head volume conductor modeling. Especially for the MEG, the modeling of skull spongiosa and compacta might be neglected due to the weak effects; the simplification of not modeling white matter anisotropy is admissible considering the complexity and current limitations of the underlying modeling approach.