MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494407342 · doi:10.1002/hbm.22265

Classification of fMRI patterns—A study of the language network segregation in pediatric localization related epilepsy

2013· article· en· W1494407342 on OpenAlexaff
Jin Wang, Xiaozhen You, Wensong Wu, Magno R. Guillen, Mercedes Cabrerizo, Joseph Sullivan, Elizabeth Donner, Bruce Björnson, William D. Gaillard, Malek Adjouadi

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick Children
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsEpilepsyArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)Principal component analysisComputer scienceAudiologyPsychologyFeature (linguistics)Cognitive psychologyMachine learningMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a pattern classification algorithm for pediatric epilepsy using fMRI language-related activation maps. 122 fMRI datasets from a control group (64) and localization related epilepsy patients (58) provided by five children's hospitals were used. Each subject performed an auditory description decision task. Using the artificial data as training data, incremental Principal Component Analysis was used in order to generate the feature space while overcoming memory requirements of large datasets. The nearest-neighbor classifier (NNC) and the distance-based fuzzy classifier (DFC) were used to perform group separation into left dominant, right dominant, bilateral, and others. The results show no effect of age, age at seizure onset, seizure duration, or seizure etiology on group separation. Two sets of parameters were significant for group separation, the patient vs. control populations and handedness. Of the 122 real datasets, 90 subjects gave the same classification results across all the methods (three raters, LI, bootstrap LI, NNC, and DFC). For the remaining datasets, 18 cases for the IPCA-NNC and 21 cases for the IPCA-DFC agreed with the majority of the five classification results (three visual ratings and two LI results). Kappa values vary from 0.59 to 0.73 for NNC and 0.61 to 0.75 for DFC, which indicate good agreement between NNC or DFC with traditional methods. The proposed method as designed can serve as an alternative method to corroborate existing LI and visual rating classification methods and to resolve some of the cases near the boundaries in between categories.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207