Tommi Raij
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Tommi Raij has a total of 68 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Jyrki Ahveninen
Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Dept. of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
3 shared publicationsBenjamin Letham
MGH/MIT/HMS Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, MA, USA
2 shared publications- Fa-Hsuan Lin
Physical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
2 shared publications John W. Belliveau
MGH/MIT/HMS Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Bldg 149, 13th St, Charlestown, MA, USA
2 shared publicationsMatti Hämäläinen
MGH/MIT/HMS Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Bldg 149, 13th St, Charlestown, MA, USA
2 shared publicationsTori Turpin
Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Dept. of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
High-Definition MEG Source Estimation using the Reciprocal Boundary Element Fast Multipole Method
Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) source estimation relies on the computation of the gain (lead-field) matrix, which embodies the linear relationship between the amplitudes of the sources and the recorded signals. However, with a realistic forward model, the calculation of the gain matrix in a “direct” fashion is a computationally expensive task because the number of dipolar sources in standard MEG pipelines is often limited to ∼10,000. We propose a fast approach based on the reciprocal relationship between MEG and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). This approach couples naturally with the charge-based boundary element fast multipole method (BEM-FMM), which allows us to efficiently generate gain matrices for high-resolution multi-layer non-nested meshes involving source spaces of up to a ∼1 million dipoles. We evaluate our approach by performing MEG source reconstruction against simulated data (at varying noise levels) obtained from the direct computation of MEG readings from 2000 different dipole positions over the cortical surface of 5 healthy subjects. Additionally, we test our methods with real MEG data from evoked somatosensory fields by right-hand median nerve stimulation in these same 5 subjects. We compare our experimental source reconstruction results against the standard MNE-Python source reconstruction pipeline.
Open AccessHigh-Definition MEG Source Estimation using the Reciprocal Boundary Element Fast Multipole Method
Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) source estimation relies on the computation of the gain (lead-field) matrix, which embodies the linear relationship between the amplitudes of the sources and the recorded signals. However, with a realistic forward model, the calculation of the gain matrix in a “direct” fashion is a computationally expensive task because the number of dipolar sources in standard MEG pipelines is often limited to ∼10,000. We propose a fast approach based on the reciprocal relationship between MEG and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). This approach couples naturally with the charge-based boundary element fast multipole method (BEM-FMM), which allows us to efficiently generate gain matrices for high-resolution multi-layer non-nested meshes involving source spaces of up to a ∼1 million dipoles. We evaluate our approach by performing MEG source reconstruction against simulated data (at varying noise levels) obtained from the direct computation of MEG readings from 2000 different dipole positions over the cortical surface of 5 healthy subjects. Additionally, we test our methods with real MEG data from evoked somatosensory fields by right-hand median nerve stimulation in these same 5 subjects. We compare our experimental source reconstruction results against the standard MNE-Python source reconstruction pipeline.
- Open Access
- 28 February 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 18 (3) , 649-658
Decoding auditory working memory content from EEG responses to auditory-cortical TMS
- 28 February 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 18 (3) , 649-658
Open AccessDecoding auditory working memory content from EEG responses to auditory-cortical TMS
- Open Access
- 15 March 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 16 (2) , 619-627
Depression core network-based individualized targeting for transcranial magnetic stimulation
- 15 March 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 16 (2) , 619-627
Open AccessDepression core network-based individualized targeting for transcranial magnetic stimulation
- 17 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface
- Vol. 26 (4) , 745-754
Targeted Modulation of Human Brain Interregional Effective Connectivity With Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity
- 17 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface
- Vol. 26 (4) , 745-754
Targeted Modulation of Human Brain Interregional Effective Connectivity With Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity
- Open Access
- 18 August 2022
- Published by Wiley in Human Brain Mapping
- Vol. 44 (2) , 362-372
Cortical depth profiles of auditory and visual 7 T functional MRI responses in human superior temporal areas
Invasive neurophysiological studies in nonhuman primates have shown different laminar activation profiles to auditory vs. visual stimuli in auditory cortices and adjacent polymodal areas. Means to examine the underlying feedforward vs. feedback type influences noninvasively have been limited in humans. Here, using 1‐mm isotropic resolution 3D echo‐planar imaging at 7 T, we studied the intracortical depth profiles of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) signals to brief auditory (noise bursts) and visual (checkerboard) stimuli. BOLD percent‐signal‐changes were estimated at 11 equally spaced intracortical depths, within regions‐of‐interest encompassing auditory (Heschl's gyrus, Heschl's sulcus, planum temporale, and posterior superior temporal gyrus) and polymodal (middle and posterior superior temporal sulcus) areas. Effects of differing BOLD signal strengths for auditory and visual stimuli were controlled via normalization and statistical modeling. The BOLD depth profile shapes, modeled with quadratic regression, were significantly different for auditory vs. visual stimuli in auditory cortices, but not in polymodal areas. The different depth profiles could reflect sensory‐specific feedforward versus cross‐sensory feedback influences, previously shown in laminar recordings in nonhuman primates. The results suggest that intracortical BOLD profiles can help distinguish between feedforward and feedback type influences in the human brain. Further experimental studies are still needed to clarify how underlying signal strength influences BOLD depth profiles under different stimulus conditions.
- 18 August 2022
- Published by Wiley in Human Brain Mapping
- Vol. 44 (2) , 362-372
Open AccessCortical depth profiles of auditory and visual 7 T functional MRI responses in human superior temporal areas
Invasive neurophysiological studies in nonhuman primates have shown different laminar activation profiles to auditory vs. visual stimuli in auditory cortices and adjacent polymodal areas. Means to examine the underlying feedforward vs. feedback type influences noninvasively have been limited in humans. Here, using 1‐mm isotropic resolution 3D echo‐planar imaging at 7 T, we studied the intracortical depth profiles of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) signals to brief auditory (noise bursts) and visual (checkerboard) stimuli. BOLD percent‐signal‐changes were estimated at 11 equally spaced intracortical depths, within regions‐of‐interest encompassing auditory (Heschl's gyrus, Heschl's sulcus, planum temporale, and posterior superior temporal gyrus) and polymodal (middle and posterior superior temporal sulcus) areas. Effects of differing BOLD signal strengths for auditory and visual stimuli were controlled via normalization and statistical modeling. The BOLD depth profile shapes, modeled with quadratic regression, were significantly different for auditory vs. visual stimuli in auditory cortices, but not in polymodal areas. The different depth profiles could reflect sensory‐specific feedforward versus cross‐sensory feedback influences, previously shown in laminar recordings in nonhuman primates. The results suggest that intracortical BOLD profiles can help distinguish between feedforward and feedback type influences in the human brain. Further experimental studies are still needed to clarify how underlying signal strength influences BOLD depth profiles under different stimulus conditions.
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 7 (1) , 80-84
Targeting of White Matter Tracts with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Stimulation
- Vol. 7 (1) , 80-84
Targeting of White Matter Tracts with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
- 1 November 2011
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Research
- Vol. 1422, 66-81
Short-term plasticity as a neural mechanism supporting memory and attentional functions
- 1 November 2011
- Published by Elsevier in Brain Research
- Vol. 1422, 66-81
Short-term plasticity as a neural mechanism supporting memory and attentional functions
- 1 January 2011
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Neuroscience Methods
- Vol. 194 (2) , 374-379
Statistically robust measurement of evoked response onset latencies
- 1 January 2011
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Neuroscience Methods
- Vol. 194 (2) , 374-379
Statistically robust measurement of evoked response onset latencies
- 17 May 2010
- Published by Wiley in European Journal of Neuroscience
- Vol. 31 (10) , 1772-1782
Onset timing of cross‐sensory activations and multisensory interactions in auditory and visual sensory cortices
Here we report early cross‐sensory activations and audiovisual interactions at the visual and auditory cortices using magnetoencephalography (MEG) to obtain accurate timing information. Data from an identical fMRI experiment were employed to support MEG source localization results. Simple auditory and visual stimuli (300‐ms noise bursts and checkerboards) were presented to seven healthy humans. MEG source analysis suggested generators in the auditory and visual sensory cortices for both within‐modality and cross‐sensory activations. fMRI cross‐sensory activations were strong in the visual but almost absent in the auditory cortex; this discrepancy with MEG possibly reflects the influence of acoustical scanner noise in fMRI. In the primary auditory cortices (Heschl’s gyrus) the onset of activity to auditory stimuli was observed at 23 ms in both hemispheres, and to visual stimuli at 82 ms in the left and at 75 ms in the right hemisphere. In the primary visual cortex (Calcarine fissure) the activations to visual stimuli started at 43 ms and to auditory stimuli at 53 ms. Cross‐sensory activations thus started later than sensory‐specific activations, by 55 ms in the auditory cortex and by 10 ms in the visual cortex, suggesting that the origins of the cross‐sensory activations may be in the primary sensory cortices of the opposite modality, with conduction delays (from one sensory cortex to another) of 30–35 ms. Audiovisual interactions started at 85 ms in the left auditory, 80 ms in the right auditory and 74 ms in the visual cortex, i.e., 3–21 ms after inputs from the two modalities converged.
- 17 May 2010
- Published by Wiley in European Journal of Neuroscience
- Vol. 31 (10) , 1772-1782
Onset timing of cross‐sensory activations and multisensory interactions in auditory and visual sensory cortices
Here we report early cross‐sensory activations and audiovisual interactions at the visual and auditory cortices using magnetoencephalography (MEG) to obtain accurate timing information. Data from an identical fMRI experiment were employed to support MEG source localization results. Simple auditory and visual stimuli (300‐ms noise bursts and checkerboards) were presented to seven healthy humans. MEG source analysis suggested generators in the auditory and visual sensory cortices for both within‐modality and cross‐sensory activations. fMRI cross‐sensory activations were strong in the visual but almost absent in the auditory cortex; this discrepancy with MEG possibly reflects the influence of acoustical scanner noise in fMRI. In the primary auditory cortices (Heschl’s gyrus) the onset of activity to auditory stimuli was observed at 23 ms in both hemispheres, and to visual stimuli at 82 ms in the left and at 75 ms in the right hemisphere. In the primary visual cortex (Calcarine fissure) the activations to visual stimuli started at 43 ms and to auditory stimuli at 53 ms. Cross‐sensory activations thus started later than sensory‐specific activations, by 55 ms in the auditory cortex and by 10 ms in the visual cortex, suggesting that the origins of the cross‐sensory activations may be in the primary sensory cortices of the opposite modality, with conduction delays (from one sensory cortex to another) of 30–35 ms. Audiovisual interactions started at 85 ms in the left auditory, 80 ms in the right auditory and 74 ms in the visual cortex, i.e., 3–21 ms after inputs from the two modalities converged.
- 1 May 2008
- Published by Elsevier in NeuroImage
- Vol. 40 (4) , 1792-1797
Parallel input makes the brain run faster
- 1 May 2008
- Published by Elsevier in NeuroImage
- Vol. 40 (4) , 1792-1797
Parallel input makes the brain run faster