MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023331163 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2013.6637805

Independent component analysis on Lie groups for multi-object analysis of first episode depression

2013· article· en· W2023331163 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Ramezani, Abtin Rasoulian, Ingrid S. Johnsrude, Tom Hollenstein, Kate L. Harkness, Purang Abolmaesumi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLie groupPattern recognition (psychology)Similarity (geometry)Artificial intelligenceOrientation (vector space)MathematicsPsychologySurface (topology)Object (grammar)Component analysisTangent spaceIndependent component analysisComponent (thermodynamics)Computer visionComputer sciencePure mathematicsGeometryImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method for the analysis of brain structural data to simultaneously identify differences in position, orientation and size (i.e. pose), and in shape of multiple brain regions between young people with, and without, a depressive disorder. Different structures in both hemispheres of the brain of depressed and control participants were segmented and corresponding points on the surface of each structure were extracted. Coordinates of these surface points were used to obtain shape variations, and parameters of similarity transformations between brain structures across subjects were used to generate pose variations. Since these surface points and similarity transformations form Lie groups, a logarithmic mapping of members of the Lie groups was performed to transform them to a linear tangent space. Then, Independent Component Analysis (ICA) was used to obtain the independent sources of pose and shape variations on Lie group members, and their corresponding modulation profiles. A method for ordering the independent sources is proposed. The top ordered sources were used to detect pose and shape differences between the two groups, and confirm that even in their first depressive episode, the brains of depressed adolescents differ structurally from the brains of their nondepressed age- and sex-matched peers.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207