MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904929619 · doi:10.3389/fninf.2018.00094

An Automated Pipeline for the Analysis of PET Data on the Cortical Surface

2018· article· en· W2904929619 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arnaud Marcoux, Ninon Burgos, Anne Bertrand, Marc Teichmann, Alexandre Routier, Junhao Wen, Jorge Samper‐Gonzàlez, Simona Bottani, Stanley Durrleman, Marie‐Odile Habert, Olivier Colliot

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroinformatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFP7 People: Marie-Curie ActionsNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationEuropean Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiBioClinicaBiogenPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationAgence Nationale de la RechercheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaHorizon 2020U.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsPipeline (software)Computer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a fully automatic pipeline for the analysis of PET data on the cortical surface. Our pipeline combines tools from FreeSurfer and PETPVC, and consists of (i) co-registration of PET and T1-w MRI (T1) images, (ii) intensity normalization, (iii) partial volume correction, (iv) robust projection of the PET signal onto the subject's cortical surface, (v) spatial normalization to a template, and (vi) atlas statistics. We evaluated the performance of the proposed workflow by performing group comparisons and showed that the approach was able to identify the areas of hypometabolism characteristic of different dementia syndromes: Alzheimer's disease (AD) and both the semantic and logopenic variants of primary progressive aphasia. We also showed that these results were comparable to those obtained with a standard volume-based approach. We then performed individual classifications and showed that vertices can be used as features to differentiate cognitively normal and AD subjects. This pipeline is integrated into Clinica, an open-source software platform for neuroscience studies available at www.clinica.run.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.014

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroinformaticsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207