These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

336 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25514516)

  • 1. How to detect the Granger-causal flow direction in the presence of additive noise?
    Vinck M; Huurdeman L; Bosman CA; Fries P; Battaglia FP; Pennartz CM; Tiesinga PH
    Neuroimage; 2015 Mar; 108():301-18. PubMed ID: 25514516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A critical assessment of connectivity measures for EEG data: a simulation study.
    Haufe S; Nikulin VV; Müller KR; Nolte G
    Neuroimage; 2013 Jan; 64():120-33. PubMed ID: 23006806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Lag-based effective connectivity applied to fMRI: a simulation study highlighting dependence on experimental parameters and formulation.
    Rodrigues J; Andrade A
    Neuroimage; 2014 Apr; 89():358-77. PubMed ID: 24513528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Measuring directed functional connectivity using non-parametric directionality analysis: Validation and comparison with non-parametric Granger Causality.
    West TO; Halliday DM; Bressler SL; Farmer SF; Litvak V
    Neuroimage; 2020 Sep; 218():116796. PubMed ID: 32325209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Network inference in the presence of latent confounders: the role of instantaneous causalities.
    Elsegai H; Shiells H; Thiel M; Schelter B
    J Neurosci Methods; 2015 Apr; 245():91-106. PubMed ID: 25707304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessing the strength of directed influences among neural signals: an approach to noisy data.
    Sommerlade L; Thiel M; Mader M; Mader W; Timmer J; Platt B; Schelter B
    J Neurosci Methods; 2015 Jan; 239():47-64. PubMed ID: 25256644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of measurement noise on Granger causality.
    Nalatore H; Sasikumar N; Rangarajan G
    Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys; 2014 Dec; 90(6):062127. PubMed ID: 25615064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A copula approach to assessing Granger causality.
    Hu M; Liang H
    Neuroimage; 2014 Oct; 100():125-34. PubMed ID: 24945669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Identifying Granger causal relationships between neural power dynamics and variables of interest.
    Winkler I; Haufe S; Porbadnigk AK; Müller KR; Dähne S
    Neuroimage; 2015 May; 111():489-504. PubMed ID: 25554431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Granger causality revisited.
    Friston KJ; Bastos AM; Oswal A; van Wijk B; Richter C; Litvak V
    Neuroimage; 2014 Nov; 101():796-808. PubMed ID: 25003817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Detectability of Granger causality for subsampled continuous-time neurophysiological processes.
    Barnett L; Seth AK
    J Neurosci Methods; 2017 Jan; 275():93-121. PubMed ID: 27826091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Componential Granger causality, and its application to identifying the source and mechanisms of the top-down biased activation that controls attention to affective vs sensory processing.
    Ge T; Feng J; Grabenhorst F; Rolls ET
    Neuroimage; 2012 Jan; 59(2):1846-58. PubMed ID: 21888980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Spike-field Granger causality for hybrid neural data analysis.
    Gong X; Li W; Liang H
    J Neurophysiol; 2019 Aug; 122(2):809-822. PubMed ID: 31242046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Canonical Granger causality between regions of interest.
    Ashrafulla S; Haldar JP; Joshi AA; Leahy RM
    Neuroimage; 2013 Dec; 83():189-99. PubMed ID: 23811410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effects of spike sorting error on the Granger causality index.
    Shao PC; Tseng WT; Kuo CC; Shann WC; Tsai ML; Yen CC
    Neural Netw; 2013 Oct; 46():249-59. PubMed ID: 23845518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Inference of Granger causal time-dependent influences in noisy multivariate time series.
    Sommerlade L; Thiel M; Platt B; Plano A; Riedel G; Grebogi C; Timmer J; Schelter B
    J Neurosci Methods; 2012 Jan; 203(1):173-85. PubMed ID: 21944999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Using phase shift Granger causality to measure directed connectivity in EEG recordings.
    Marshall WJ; Lackner CL; Marriott P; Santesso DL; Segalowitz SJ
    Brain Connect; 2014 Dec; 4(10):826-41. PubMed ID: 25392086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Behaviour of Granger causality under filtering: theoretical invariance and practical application.
    Barnett L; Seth AK
    J Neurosci Methods; 2011 Oct; 201(2):404-19. PubMed ID: 21864571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Causal inference in neuronal time-series using adaptive decomposition.
    Rodrigues J; Andrade A
    J Neurosci Methods; 2015 Apr; 245():73-90. PubMed ID: 25721270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Granger causality with signal-dependent noise.
    Luo Q; Ge T; Feng J
    Neuroimage; 2011 Aug; 57(4):1422-9. PubMed ID: 21645623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.