Modeling Brain Activation in fMRI Using Group MRF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noise confounds present serious complications to functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis. The amount of discernible signals within a single dataset of a subject is often inadequate to obtain satisfactory intra-subject activation detection. To remedy this limitation, we propose a novel group Markov random field (GMRF) that extends each subject's neighborhood system to other subjects to enable information coalescing. A distinct advantage of GMRF over standard fMRI group analysis is that no stringent one-to-one voxel correspondence is required. Instead, intra- and inter-subject neighboring voxels are jointly regularized to encourage spatially proximal voxels to be assigned similar labels across subjects. Our proposed group-extended graph structure thus provides an effective means for handling inter-subject variability. Also, adopting a group-wise approach by integrating group information into intra-subject activation, as opposed to estimating a single average group map, permits inter-subject differences to be characterized and studied. GMRF can be elegantly implemented as a single MRF, thus enabling all subjects' activation maps to be simultaneously and collaboratively segmented with global optimality guaranteed in the case of binary labeling. We validate our technique on synthetic and real fMRI data and demonstrate GMRF's superior performance over standard fMRI analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".