NIDM-Terms: community-based terminology management for improved neuroimaging dataset descriptions and query
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biomedical research community is motivated to share and reuse data from studies and projects by funding agencies and publishers. Effectively combining and reusing neuroimaging data from publicly available datasets, requires the capability to query across datasets in order to identify cohorts that match both neuroimaging and clinical/behavioral data criteria. Critical barriers to operationalizing such queries include, in part, the broad use of undefined study variables with limited or no annotations that make it difficult to understand the data available without significant interaction with the original authors. Using the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) to organize neuroimaging data has made querying across studies for specific image types possible at scale. However, in BIDS, beyond file naming and tightly controlled imaging directory structures, there are very few constraints on ancillary variable naming/meaning or experiment-specific metadata. In this work, we present NIDM-Terms, a set of user-friendly terminology management tools and associated software to better manage individual lab terminologies and help with annotating BIDS datasets. Using these tools to annotate BIDS data with a Neuroimaging Data Model (NIDM) semantic web representation, enables queries across datasets to identify cohorts with specific neuroimaging and clinical/behavioral measurements. This manuscript describes the overall informatics structures and demonstrates the use of tools to annotate BIDS datasets to perform integrated cross-cohort queries.
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 | 0.033 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
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".