MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980262550 · doi:10.3389/fncom.2013.00143

Detecting functional connectivity change points for single-subject fMRI data

2013· article· en· W1980262550 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFunctional magnetic resonance imagingFalse positive paradoxResting state fMRISet (abstract data type)Data setArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)GraphA priori and a posterioriData miningMachine learningPsychologyTheoretical computer scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies there has been an increased interest in understanding the dynamic manner in which brain regions communicate with one another, as subjects perform a set of experimental tasks or as their psychological state changes. Dynamic Connectivity Regression (DCR) is a data-driven technique used for detecting temporal change points in functional connectivity between brain regions where the number and location of the change points are unknown a priori. After finding the change points, DCR estimates a graph or set of relationships between the brain regions for data that falls between pairs of change points. In previous work, the method was predominantly validated using multi-subject data. In this paper, we concentrate on single-subject data and introduce a new DCR algorithm. The new algorithm increases accuracy for individual subject data with a small number of observations and reduces the number of false positives in the estimated undirected graphs. We also introduce a new Likelihood Ratio test for comparing sparse graphs across (or within) subjects; thus allowing us to determine whether data should be combined across subjects. We perform an extensive simulation analysis on vector autoregression (VAR) data as well as to an fMRI data set from a study (n = 23) of a state anxiety induction using a socially evaluative threat challenge. The focus on single-subject data allows us to study the variation between individuals and may provide us with a deeper knowledge of the workings of the brain.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.129 · 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