Stability Analysis of fMRI BOLD Signals for Disease Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated that the stability changes in physiological signals can reflect individuals' pathological conditions. Apart from this, according to system science theory, a large-scale system can generally be divided into many subsystems whose stability level govern its overall performance. Therefore, this study attempts to investigate the possibility of analyzing the stability of decomposed subsystems of resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) BOLD signals in order to assess the overall characteristic of the human brain and individuals' health conditions. We used attention deficit/hyperactive disorder (ADHD) as an example to illustrate our method. Rs-fMRI BOLD signals were first decomposed into dynamic modes (DMs) which can illuminate the patterns of brain subsystems. Each DM is associated with one eigenvalue that determines its stability as well as oscillation frequency. Accordingly, we divided the DMs within common BOLD frequency bands into stable and unstable DMs. Then, the features related to the stability of those DMs were extracted, and nine common classifiers were used to differentiate healthy controls from ADHD patients taken from ADHD-200, a well-known dataset. The results showed that almost all features were statistically significant. Additionally, our proposed approach outperforms all existing methods with the highest possible precision, recall, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 100%. In sum, we are the first to evaluate the stability of BOLD signals and demonstrate its possibility for disease diagnosis. This method can unveil new mechanisms of brain function, and could be widely used in medicine and engineering.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".