Skip to content

Commit dbcb5e1

Browse files
authored
Update EEGLAB_and_python.md
1 parent b87b8e4 commit dbcb5e1

File tree

1 file changed

+5
-42
lines changed

1 file changed

+5
-42
lines changed

others/EEGLAB_and_python.md

+5-42
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -16,53 +16,16 @@ are detailing here.
1616
Should I use MATLAB-based tools or Python-based tools
1717
-----------------------------------------------------
1818

19-
One of the most important feature when using a software package is usage and community.
19+
One of the most important features when using a software package is usage and community.
2020
If the community is large and the software is popular, it is a safer
2121
choice as this ensures many problems people encounter have
2222
been solved - it also means that the code is probably more stable and
2323
has fewer bugs.
2424

25-
As of 2020, 56% of the citations of the
26-
papers below go to EEGLAB, then 25% go to Fieldtrip, and 19% go to
27-
Brainstorm and various versions of MNE. Note that EEGLAB and Fieldtrip
28-
are intertwined where Fieldtrip users can write [EEGLAB
29-
plugins](/others/EEGLAB_and_Fieldtrip.html)
30-
by adding simple wrappers on their Fieldtrip code. So the pair
31-
EEGLAB+Fieldtrip comprises 81% of the citations, and it is continuing to
32-
grow, with the MATLAB-based tools (which include Brainstorm) gathering
33-
about 90% of all citations. This is a strong argument for using MATLAB
34-
based tools - and in particular EEGLAB - instead of Python-based tools
35-
(i.e., MNE).
36-
37-
Below is an analysis of papers referencing EEGLAB, FieldTrip, MNE,
38-
MNE-Python, and Brainstorm since 2004. Data were obtained from Google Scholar.
39-
40-
![Screen Shot 2022-10-16 at 9 12 14 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1872705/196087854-dac4a7f6-fba0-49ab-b2b8-4ca6fc253bb1.png)
41-
42-
The number of citation per year corresponds to the following five papers:
43-
44-
- **EEGLAB**: Delorme, A. and Makeig, S., 2004. EEGLAB: an open source
45-
toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including
46-
independent component analysis. Journal of neuroscience methods,
47-
134(1), pp.9-21
48-
- **Fieldtrip**: Oostenveld, R., Fries, P., Maris, E., Schoffelen, JM
49-
(2011). FieldTrip: Open Source Software for Advanced Analysis of
50-
MEG, EEG, and Invasive Electrophysiological Data. Computational
51-
Intelligence and Neuroscience, Volume 2011 (2011)
52-
- **MNE 1**: A. Gramfort, M. Luessi, E. Larson, D. Engemann, D.
53-
Strohmeier, C. Brodbeck, L. Parkkonen, M. Hämäläinen, MNE software
54-
for processing MEG and EEG data, NeuroImage, Volume 86, 1 February
55-
2014, Pages 446-460, ISSN 1053-8119,
56-
- **MNE Python**: A. Gramfort, M. Luessi, E. Larson, D. Engemann, D.
57-
Strohmeier, C. Brodbeck, R. Goj, M. Jas, T. Brooks, L. Parkkonen, M.
58-
Hämäläinen, MEG and EEG data analysis with MNE-Python, Frontiers in
59-
Neuroscience, Volume 7, 2013, ISSN 1662-453X
60-
- **Brainstorm**: Tadel, F., Baillet, S., Mosher, J.C., Pantazis, D.
61-
and Leahy, R.M., 2011. Brainstorm: a user-friendly application for
62-
MEG/EEG analysis. Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2011,
63-
p.8.
64-
65-
See also this third-party [report](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuri.2023.100154) which compares EEGLAB citations with other EEG analysis software packages.
25+
Below is the figure in an independent [2024 article](https://apertureneuro.org/article/116386-the-art-of-brainwaves-a-survey-on-event-related-potential-visualization-practices) showing the popularity of all software packages.
26+
![image_eeglab](https://github.com/sccn/sccn.github.io/assets/1872705/4a2de7bc-ee1d-450f-8314-48d3294d54f4)
27+
28+
See also this third-party [2023 report](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuri.2023.100154), which compares EEGLAB citations with other EEG analysis software packages.
6629

6730
Major differences between MATLAB and Python
6831
-------------------------------------------

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)