MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Minimal specifications for non-human primate MRI: Challenges in standardizing and harmonizing data collection

2021· preprint· en· W3092544634 on OpenAlexafffund
Joonas A. Autio, Qi Zhu, Xiaolian Li, Matthew F. Glasser, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik, Damien A. Fair, Jan Zimmermann, Essa Yacoub, Ravi S. Menon, David C. Van Essen, Takuya Hayashi, Brian E. Russ, Wim Vanduffel

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental HealthNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKU LeuvenMcDonnell Center for Systems NeuroscienceNational Science FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringVlaamse regeringResearch Complex ProgramRIKENFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekJapan Agency for Medical Research and DevelopmentEuropean CommissionJapan Science and Technology AgencyNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsNeuroimagingComputer scienceData sharingNon human primateData scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent methodological advances in MRI have enabled substantial growth in neuroimaging studies of non-human primates (NHPs), while open data-sharing through the PRIME-DE initiative has increased the availability of NHP MRI data and the need for robust multi-subject multi-center analyses. Streamlined acquisition and analysis protocols would accelerate and improve these efforts. However, consensus on minimal standards for data acquisition protocols and analysis pipelines for NHP imaging remains to be established, particularly for multi-center studies. Here, we draw parallels between NHP and human neuroimaging and provide minimal guidelines for harmonizing and standardizing data acquisition. We advocate robust translation of widely used open-access toolkits that are well established for analyzing human data. We also encourage the use of validated, automated pre-processing tools for analyzing NHP data sets. These guidelines aim to refine methodological and analytical strategies for small and large-scale NHP neuroimaging data. This will improve reproducibility of results, and accelerate the convergence between NHP and human neuroimaging strategies which will ultimately benefit fundamental and translational brain science.

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)0.200
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.309
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2000.309
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0090.008
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.330
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.100 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→