MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062421008 · doi:10.1117/12.506118

Wavelet variance components in image space for spatio-temporal neuroimaging data

2003· article· en· W2062421008 on OpenAlexaff
John A. D. Aston, Federico Turkheimer, Vincent J. Cunningham, Roger N. Gunn

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletComputer scienceThresholdingEstimatorArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Wavelet transformParametric statisticsImage (mathematics)Variance (accounting)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Typical neuroimaging studies place great emphasis on not only the estimation but also the standard error estimates of underlying parameters derived from a temporal model. This is principally done to facilitate the use of t-statistics. Due to the spatial correlations in the data, it can often be more advantageous to interrogate models in the wavelet domain than in the image domain. However, widespread acceptance of these wavelet techniques has been hampered due to the limited ability to generate both parametric and error estimates in the image domain from these temporal models in the wavelet domain, without which comparison to current standard non-wavelet methods can prove difficult. This paper introduces a derivation of these estimates and an implementation for their calculation from these models for a class of thresholding estimators which have been shown to be useful for neuroimaging studies. This work stems from a consideration of the wavelet operator as a multidimensional linear operator and builds on work from the image processing community.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207