MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999007024 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ab6aad

Common misconceptions, hidden biases and modern challenges of dMRI tractography

2020· review· en· W2999007024 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTractographyHuman Connectome ProjectComputer scienceConnectomicsFocus (optics)ConnectomeDiffusion MRIData scienceField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceFunctional connectivityNeurosciencePsychologyMedicineMathematicsMagnetic resonance imagingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human brain is a complex and organized network, where the connection between regions is not achieved with single axons crisscrossing each other but rather millions of densely packed and well-ordered axons. Reconstruction from diffusion MRI tractography is only an attempt to capture the full complexity of this network, at the macroscale. This review provides an overview of the misconceptions, biases and pitfalls present in structural white matter bundle and connectome reconstruction using tractography. The goal is not to discourage readers, but rather to inform them of the limitations present in the methods used by researchers in the field in order to focus on what they can do and promote proper interpretations of their results. It also provides a list of open problems that could be solved in future research projects for the next generation of PhD students.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.191 · 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