This paper introduces the use of wavelet analysis to follow the temporal variations in the coupling between oscillatory neural signals. Coherence, based on Fourier analysis, has been commonly used as a first approximation to track such coupling under the assumption that neural signals are stationary. Yet, stationary neural processing may be the exception rather than the rule. In this context, the recent application to physical systems of a wavelet-based coherence, which does not depend on the stationarity of the signals, is highly relevant. This paper fully develops the method of wavelet coherence and its statistical properties so that it can be practically applied to continuous neural signals. In realistic simulations, we show that, in contrast to Fourier coherence, wavelet coherence can detect short, significant episodes of coherence between non-stationary neural signals. This method can be directly applied for an ‘online’ quantification of the instantaneous coherence between two signals.

Key words: wavelet, coherence, synchrony, EEG, LFP

The quantification of phase synchrony between neuronal signals is of crucial importance for the study of large-scale interactions in the brain. Two methods have been used to date in neuroscience, based on two distinct approaches which permit a direct estimation of the instantaneous phase of a signal [Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 3291; Human Brain Mapping 8 (1999) 194]. The phase is either estimated by using the analytic concept of Hilbert transform or, alternatively, by convolution with a complex wavelet. In both methods the stability of the instantaneous phase over a window of time requires quantification by means of various statistical dependence parameters (standard deviation, Shannon entropy or mutual information). The purpose of this paper is to conduct a direct comparison between these two methods on three signal sets: (1) neural models; (2) intracranial signals from epileptic patients; and (3) scalp EEG recordings. Levels of synchrony that can be considered as reliable are estimated by using the technique of surrogate data. Our results demonstrate that the differences between the methods are minor, and we conclude that they are fundamentally equivalent for the study of neuroelectrical signals. This offers a common language and framework that can be used for future research in the area of synchronization.

Key words: phase synchrony, neural synchrony, Hilbert transform, wavelet transform, surrogate data