MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993762614 · doi:10.1177/0962280212448974

A Skew-t space-varying regression model for the spectral analysis of resting state brain activity

2012· article· en· W1993762614 on OpenAlexafffund
Salimah Ismail, Wenqi Sun, Farouk S. Nathoo, Arif Babul, Alexader Moiseev, Mirza Faisal Beg, Naznin Virji‐Babul

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Methods in Medical Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDown Syndrome Research FoundationSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSkewResting state fMRIRegression analysisState spaceRegressionMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsEconometricsStatistical physicsNeurosciencePsychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is known that in many neurological disorders such as Down syndrome, main brain rhythms shift their frequencies slightly, and characterizing the spatial distribution of these shifts is of interest. This article reports on the development of a Skew-t mixed model for the spatial analysis of resting state brain activity in healthy controls and individuals with Down syndrome. Time series of oscillatory brain activity are recorded using magnetoencephalography, and spectral summaries are examined at multiple sensor locations across the scalp. We focus on the mean frequency of the power spectral density, and use space-varying regression to examine associations with age, gender and Down syndrome across several scalp regions. Spatial smoothing priors are incorporated based on a multivariate Markov random field, and the markedly non-Gaussian nature of the spectral response variable is accommodated by the use of a Skew-t distribution. A range of models representing different assumptions on the association structure and response distribution are examined, and we conduct model selection using the deviance information criterion. (1) Our analysis suggests region-specific differences between healthy controls and individuals with Down syndrome, particularly in the left and right temporal regions, and produces smoothed maps indicating the scalp topography of the estimated differences.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.595
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Methods in Medical ResearchSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207