Spatially-enhanced clusterwise inference for testing and localizing intermodal correspondence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increasing availability of neuroimaging data from multiple modalities-each providing a different lens through which to study brain structure or function-new techniques for comparing, integrating, and interpreting information within and across modalities have emerged. Recent developments include hypothesis tests of associations between neuroimaging modalities, which can be used to determine the statistical significance of intermodal associations either throughout the entire brain or within anatomical subregions or functional networks. While these methods provide a crucial foundation for inference on intermodal relationships, they cannot be used to answer questions about where in the brain these associations are most pronounced. In this paper, we introduce a new method, called CLEAN-R, that can be used both to test intermodal correspondence throughout the brain and also to localize this correspondence. Our method involves first adjusting for the underlying spatial autocorrelation structure within each modality before aggregating information within small clusters to construct a map of enhanced test statistics. Using structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging data from a subsample of children and adolescents from the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort, we conduct simulations and data analyses where we illustrate the high statistical power and nominal type I error levels of our method. By constructing an interpretable map of group-level correspondence using spatially-enhanced test statistics, our method offers insights beyond those provided by earlier methods.
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 | 0.032 | 0.166 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".