MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035809474 · doi:10.1002/jmri.27188

Mapping Structural Connectivity Using Diffusion <scp>MRI</scp>: Challenges and Opportunities

2020· review· en· W3035809474 on OpenAlexaff
Chun‐Hung Yeh, Derek K. Jones, Xiaoyun Liang, Maxime Descoteaux, Alan Connelly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersAustralian Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilState Government of VictoriaNational Health and Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
KeywordsConnectomeTractographyDiffusion MRIComputer scienceConnectomicsHuman Connectome ProjectGraph theoryGraphArtificial intelligenceData scienceComplex networkMachine learningNeuroscienceFunctional connectivityTheoretical computer sciencePsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingMathematicsMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diffusion MRI-based tractography is the most commonly-used technique when inferring the structural brain connectome, i.e., the comprehensive map of the connections in the brain. The utility of graph theory-a powerful mathematical approach for modeling complex network systems-for analyzing tractography-based connectomes brings important opportunities to interrogate connectome data, providing novel insights into the connectivity patterns and topological characteristics of brain structural networks. When applying this framework, however, there are challenges, particularly regarding methodological and biological plausibility. This article describes the challenges surrounding quantitative tractography and potential solutions. In addition, challenges related to the calculation of global network metrics based on graph theory are discussed.Evidence Level: 5Technical Efficacy: Stage 1.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations199
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207