Comparison of CPU and GPU bayesian estimates of fibre orientations from diffusion MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The correct estimation of fibre orientations is a crucial step for reconstructing human brain tracts. Bayesian Estimation of Diffusion Parameters Obtained using Sampling Techniques (bedpostx) is able to estimate several fibre orientations and their diffusion parameters per voxel using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) in a whole brain diffusion MRI data, and it is capable of running on GPUs, achieving speed-up of over 100 times compared to CPUs. However, few studies have looked at whether the results from the CPU and GPU algorithms differ. In this study, we compared CPU and GPU bedpostx outputs by running multiple trials of both algorithms on the same whole brain diffusion data and compared each distribution of output using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. RESULTS: We show that distributions of fibre fraction parameters and principal diffusion direction angles from bedpostx and bedpostx_gpu display few statistically significant differences in shape and are localized sparsely throughout the whole brain. Average output differences are small in magnitude compared to underlying uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Despite small amount of differences in output between CPU and GPU bedpostx algorithms, results are comparable given the difference in operation order and library usage between CPU and GPU bedpostx.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".