Selection Criteria for the Analysis of Data-Driven Clusters in Cerebral fMRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional MRI (fMRI) may be possible without a priori models of the cerebral hemodynamic response. First, such data-driven fMRI requires that all cerebral territories with distinct patterns be identified. Second, a systematic selection method is necessary to prevent the subjective interpretation of the identified territories. This paper addresses the second point by proposing a novel method for the automated interpretation of identified territories in data-driven fMRI. Selection criteria are formulated using: 1) the temporal cross-correlation between each identified territory and the paradigm and 2) the spatial contiguity of the corresponding voxel map. Ten event-design fMRI data sets are analyzed with one prominent algorithm, fuzzy c-means clustering, before applying the selection criteria. For comparison, these data are also analyzed with an established, model-based method: statistical parametric mapping. Both methods produced similar results and identified potential activation in the expected territory of the sensorimotor cortex in all ten data sets. Moreover, the proposed method classified distinct territories in separate clusters. Selected clusters have a mean temporal correlation coefficient of 0.39+/-0.07 (n=19) with a mean 2.7+/-1.4 second response delay. At most, four separate contiguous territories were observed in 87% of these clusters. These results suggest that the proposed method may be effective for exploratory fMRI studies where the hemodynamic response is perturbed during cerebrovascular disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".