Translating phenotypic prediction models from big to small anatomical MRI data using meta-matching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individualized phenotypic prediction based on structural MRI is an important goal in neuroscience. Prediction performance increases with larger samples, but small-scale datasets with fewer than 200 participants are often unavoidable. We have previously proposed a "meta-matching" framework to translate models trained from large datasets to improve the prediction of new unseen phenotypes in small collection efforts. Meta-matching exploits correlations between phenotypes, yielding large improvement over classical machine learning when applied to prediction models using resting-state functional connectivity as input features. Here, we adapt the two best performing meta-matching variants ("meta-matching finetune" and "meta-matching stacking") from our previous study to work with T1-weighted MRI data by changing the base neural network architecture to a 3D convolution neural network. We compare the two meta-matching variants with elastic net and classical transfer learning using the UK Biobank (N = 36,461), Human Connectome Project Young Adults (HCP-YA) dataset (N = 1,017) and HCP-Aging dataset (N = 656). We find that meta-matching outperforms elastic net and classical transfer learning by a large margin, both when translating models within the same dataset, as well as translating models across datasets with different MRI scanners, acquisition protocols and demographics. For example, when translating a UK Biobank model to 100 HCP-YA participants, meta-matching finetune yielded a 136% improvement in variance explained over transfer learning, with an average absolute gain of 2.6% (minimum = -0.9%, maximum = 17.6%) across 35 phenotypes. Overall, our results highlight the versatility of the meta-matching framework.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".