Qualitative and Quantitative Comparative Analysis of Common Normal Variants and Physiological Artifacts in MEG and EEG

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-ND-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,965 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) provide complementary insights into brain activity, yet their distinct biophysical principles influence how normal neurophysiological patterns and artifacts are represented. This study presents a comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analysis of common physiological variants and artifacts in simultaneously recorded MEG and EEG data. We systematically examined patterns such as alpha spindles, sensorimotor rhythms, sleep-related waveforms (vertex waves, K-complexes, sleep spindles, and posterior slow waves of youth), as well as common artifacts including eye blinks, chewing, and movement-related interferences. By applying time-domain, time-frequency, and source- space analyses, we identified modality-specific differences in signal representation, source localization, and artifact susceptibility. Our results demonstrate that MEG provides a more spatially focal representation of physiological patterns, whereas EEG captures broader, radially oriented cortical activity. Mutual information analysis indicated that MEG-derived independent components exhibited greater topographical variability and higher information content for neurophysiological activity, while EEG components were more homogeneous. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) analysis confirmed that MEG gradiometers capture the highest total information, followed by magnetometers and then EEG. Notably, physiological signals such as vertex waves and K-complexes exhibited significantly higher total information in MEG, whereas EEG was more sensitive to high-amplitude artifacts, including swallowing and muscle activity. These findings highlight the distinct strengths and limitations of MEG and EEG, reinforcing the necessity of multimodal approaches in clinical and research applications to improve the accuracy of neurophysiological assessments. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-24T02:00:01.246996+00:00
License: CC-BY-ND-4.0