MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531143546 · doi:10.3389/fnana.2016.00096

Merged Group Tractography Evaluation with Selective Automated Group Integrated Tractography

2016· article· en· W2531143546 on OpenAlexafffund
David Qixiang Chen, jinyu zhong, Dave J. Hayes, Brendan Behan, M. Walker, Peter Shih-Ping Hung, Mojgan Hodaie

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroanatomy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkKrembil FoundationUniversity of Toronto
FundersMultiple Sclerosis SocietyMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaEuropean Genomic Institute for Diabetes
KeywordsTractographyDecussationArtificial intelligenceDiffusion MRIComputer scienceHuman Connectome ProjectNeuroanatomyPattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Tractography analysis in group-based studies across large populations is difficult to manage and assess. We propose Selective Automated Group Integrated Tractography (SAGIT), an automated group tractography software platform that incorporates proven dMRI practices, in order for group-wise dMRI to be more accessible to researchers. We use a merged tractography approach that permits evaluation of tractography datasets at the group level. We also introduce an image-based score (Normalized Overlapping Score (NOS)) that can quantify the quality of the group tractography results. We deploy SAGIT to evaluate deterministic and probabilistic constrained spherical deconvolution (CSTdet, CSTprob), extended streamline tractography (XST), and diffusion tensor tractography (DTT) in their ability to delineate different neuroanatomy, as well as validating NOS across these different brain regions. Methods: MR sequences were acquired from 42 healthy adults. Anatomical and group registrations were performed using ANTs. Cortical segmentation was performed using FreeSurfer. Four tractography algorithms were used to delineate 6 sets of neuroanatomy: fornix, facial/vestibular-cochlear cranial nerve complex, vagus nerve, rubral-cerebellar decussation, optic radiation, and auditory radiation. The tracts were generated both with and without ROI filters. The generated visual reports were then evaluated by 5 neuroscientists. Results: At a group level, merged tractography demonstrated that different methods have different fiber distribution characteristics. CSTprob is prone to false-positives, and thereby suitable in anatomy with strong priors. CSTdet and XST are more conservative, but have more trouble resolving hemispherical decussation and distant crossing projections. DTT consistently shows the worst reproducibility across the anatomies. Linear regression of rater scores against NOS shows significant (p0.05) for unfiltered tractography. Conclusions: The tractography results demonstrated reliable and consistent performance of SAGIT across multiple subjects and techniques. Through SAGIT, we quantifiably demonstrated that different algorithms showed different strength and weaknesses at a group level. No single algorithm seems to be suitable for all anatomical tasks, it would be useful to consider using a mix of algorithms for different anatomical segments. Finally, we have demonstrated that merged tractography is a promising group-wise tractography analysis approach.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroanatomySame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207