MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387754881 · doi:10.1145/3608298.3608302

Examining the Impact of fMRI Preprocessing Steps on Machine Learning-Based Classification of Autism Spectrum Disorder

2023· article· en· W4387754881 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberto C. Sotero, José M. Sánchez‐Bornot, Iman Shaharabi-Farahani, Yasser Iturria‐Medina

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsPreprocessorArtificial intelligenceAutism spectrum disorderComputer scienceFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)RegressionMachine learningSIGNAL (programming language)Speech recognitionAutismMathematicsStatisticsPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data in machine learning (ML)-based classification of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been a topic of increasing research interest in past years due to the noninvasiveness of the fMRI technique and its potential for providing valuable biomarkers. However, there are still controversies surrounding some fMRI data preprocessing steps, such as bandpass filtering and global signal regression (GSR). It still needs to be determined whether or how these preprocessing steps impact the classification accuracy of ML algorithms. This paper uses fMRI signals from the ABIDE-I dataset to train a long short-term memory (LSTM) network to classify subjects into ASD or healthy controls (HC). We considered 18 preprocessing pipelines comprising all combinations of with and without filtering, with and without global signal regression, and three different segment lengths of 1 min, 2 min, and 3 min. The best model was obtained when using a segment length of 2 min. Our results suggest that not filtering produces significantly higher classification accuracies than filtering, whereas there were no significant differences in classification accuracies when removing or not the global signal.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research→French-language works237,207→