MNI-FTD Templates: Unbiased Average Templates of Frontotemporal Dementia Variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Standard anatomical templates are widely used in human neuroimaging processing pipelines to facilitate group level analyses and comparisons across different subjects and populations. The MNI-ICBM152 template is the most commonly used standard template, representing an average of 152 healthy young adult brains. However, in patients with neurodegenerative diseases such as frontotemporal dementia (FTD), the high levels of atrophy lead to significant differences between the brain shape of the individuals and the MNI-ICBM152 template. Such differences might inevitably lead to registration errors or subtle biases in downstream analyses and results. Disease-specific templates are therefore desirable to reflect the anatomical characteristics of the populations of interest and to reduce potential registration errors when processing data from such populations. Here, we present MNI-FTD136, MNI-bvFTD70, MNI-svFTD36, and MNI-pnfaFTD30, four unbiased average templates of 136 FTD patients, 70 behavioural variant (bv), 36 semantic variant (sv), and 30 progressive nonfluent aphasia (pnfa) variant FTD patients as well as a corresponding age matched average template of 133 healthy controls (MNI-CN133), along with probabilistic tissue maps for each template. The public availability of these templates will facilitate analyses of FTD cohorts and enable comparisons between different studies in a common standardized space appropriate to FTD populations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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.
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".