Chaos analysis of the cortical boundary for the recognition of psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Structural MRI studies in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) and those in the clinical high-risk (CHR) state have consistently shown volumetric abnormalities that depict changes in the structural complexity of the cortical boundary. The aim of the present study was to employ chaos analysis in the identification of people with psychosis based on the structural complexity of the cortical boundary and subcortical areas. METHODS: We performed chaos analysis of the grey matter distribution on structural MRIs. First, the outer boundary points for each slice in the axial, coronal and sagittal view were calculated for grey matter maps. Next, the distance of each boundary point from the centre of mass in the grey matter was calculated and stored as spatial series, which was further analyzed by extracting the Largest Lyapunov Exponent (lambda [λ]), a feature depicting the structural complexity of the cortical boundary. RESULTS: Structural MRIs were acquired from 77 FEP, 73 CHR and 44 healthy controls. We compared λ brain maps between groups, which resulted in statistically significant differences in all comparisons. By matching the λ values extracted in axial view with the Morlet wavelet, differences on the surface relief are observed between groups. LIMITATIONS: Parameters were selected after experimentation on the examined sample. Investigation of the effectiveness of the method in a larger data set is needed. CONCLUSION: The proposed framework using spatial series verifies diagnosis-relevant features and may contribute to the identification of structural biomarkers for psychosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".