MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220833183 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2022.3161947

Invertible Modeling of Bidirectional Relationships in Neuroimaging With Normalizing Flows: Application to Brain Aging

2022· article· en· W4220833183 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthias Wilms, Jordan J. Bannister, Pauline Mouchès, M. Ethan MacDonald, Deepthi Rajashekar, Sönke Langner, Nils D. Forkert

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersCalgary FoundationUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsBrain morphometryNeuroimagingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGenerative modelMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Generative grammarPsychologyNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many machine learning tasks in neuroimaging aim at modeling complex relationships between a brain's morphology as seen in structural MR images and clinical scores and variables of interest. A frequently modeled process is healthy brain aging for which many image-based brain age estimation or age-conditioned brain morphology template generation approaches exist. While age estimation is a regression task, template generation is related to generative modeling. Both tasks can be seen as inverse directions of the same relationship between brain morphology and age. However, this view is rarely exploited and most existing approaches train separate models for each direction. In this paper, we propose a novel bidirectional approach that unifies score regression and generative morphology modeling and we use it to build a bidirectional brain aging model. We achieve this by defining an invertible normalizing flow architecture that learns a probability distribution of 3D brain morphology conditioned on age. The use of full 3D brain data is achieved by deriving a manifold-constrained formulation that models morphology variations within a low-dimensional subspace of diffeomorphic transformations. This modeling idea is evaluated on a database of MR scans of more than 5000 subjects. The evaluation results show that our bidirectional brain aging model (1) accurately estimates brain age, (2) is able to visually explain its decisions through attribution maps and counterfactuals, (3) generates realistic age-specific brain morphology templates, (4) supports the analysis of morphological variations, and (5) can be utilized for subject-specific brain aging simulation.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207