[Mne_analysis] SSP vs. ICA for Artifact Correction

[Tuomas Puoliväli]

Dear Matthew,

There is a recent study by Haumann and co-authors that compares ICA with
SSP for rejecting artefacts (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27524998).
They conclude that ICA performs better than SSP but one should be careful
with ICA when dealing with low SNR data.

Best regards,
Tuomas



On 8 September 2016 at 21:42, Boggess, Matthew Jozsef <
MBOGGESS at mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> MNE provides both SSP and ICA methods for correcting artifacts (eye
> blinks, saccades, and heartbeat). However, I haven't ever seen these
> methods compared and was curious if anyone has any reasons to prefer one
> method over the other? I remember seeing on one of the MNE documentation
> pages a while back that ICA was recommended over SSP, but I haven't been
> able to find this statement anymore (perhaps it was removed?).  Was there a
> reason behind that recommendation?
>
> Thanks!
> Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mne_analysis mailing list
> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis
>
>
> The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it
> is
> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the
> e-mail
> contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance
> HelpLine at
> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in
> error
> but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and
> properly
> dispose of the e-mail.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/mne_analysis/attachments/20160908/a072467f/attachment.html