Track-To-Learn: A general framework for tractography with deep reinforcement learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract Diffusion MRI tractography is currently the only non-invasive tool able to assess the white-matter structural connectivity of a brain. Since its inception, it has been widely documented that tractography is prone to producing erroneous tracks while missing true positive connections. Anatomical priors have been conceived and implemented in classical algorithms to try and tackle these issues, yet problems still remain and the conception and validation of these priors is very challenging. Recently, supervised learning algorithms have been proposed to learn the tracking procedure implicitly from data, without relying on anatomical priors. However, these methods rely on labelled data that is very hard to obtain. To remove the need for such data but still leverage the expressiveness of neural networks, we introduce Track-To-Learn : A general framework to pose tractography as a deep reinforcement learning problem. Deep reinforcement learning is a type of machine learning that does not depend on ground-truth data but rather on the concept of “reward”. We implement and train algorithms to maximize returns from a reward function based on the alignment of streamlines with principal directions extracted from diffusion data. We show that competitive results can be obtained on known data and that the algorithms are able to generalize far better to new, unseen data, than prior machine learning-based tractography algorithms. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first successful use of deep reinforcement learning for tractography.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".