Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26457-7, published online 30 May 2018
This Article contains an error in the Y axis of Figure 4a, where ‘0.2’ and ‘0.4’ should read ‘0.5’ and ‘1.0’ respectively. The correct Figure 4 appears below as Figure 1.
Spatial resolution. Representative data showing the estimation of spatial resolution using magnitude squared coherence versus the inter-electrode distance for (a) ED, (b) EV, and (c) SD electrodes. Fits were estimated as an exponential function of the magnitude squared coherence and were weighted to the inverse of the inter-electrode distance. The dashed horizontal line at 0.3 shows the level at which the signals between signals were considered independent. (d) Spatial resolutions at 8–24 Hz. (e) Spatial resolutions at 25–80 Hz. (f) Spatial resolutions at 81–120 Hz. (g) Spatial resolutions at 121–180 Hz. Symbols show individual values, centre lines show mean, error bars show standard error of the mean. Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant effect of electrode location in the low frequency (d) (p = 0.003). However, there was effect of electrode size at any frequency band (p > 0.05) or electrode location at frequencies greater than 24 Hz (e–g). (h) Frequency dependence of spatial resolution, symbols indicate electrode size and lines are global fits at each electrode size and array. Pearson’s correlation analysis showed strong negative correlation between spatial resolution and frequency for all electrode sizes with SD arrays ρ > 0.6 (p < 0.05); moderate negative correlation 750 μm diameter EV electrodes ρ = 0.45 (p < 0.05); and weak correlations not significantly different to zero for ED electrodes and 500 μm diameter EV electrodes (p > 0.1).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
John, S.E., Opie, N.L., Wong, Y.T. et al. Author Correction: Signal quality of simultaneously recorded endovascular, subdural and epidural signals are comparable. Sci Rep 8, 17469 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-36257-8
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-36257-8
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
