Blurred streamlines: A novel representation to reduce redundancy in tractography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tractography is a powerful tool to study brain connectivity in vivo, but it is well known to suffer from an intrinsic trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. A critical - but usually underrated - parameter to choose that can heavily impact the quality of the estimates is the number of streamlines to be reconstructed for a given data set. In fact, sensitivity can be improved by generating more and more streamlines, as all real anatomical connections are likely reconstructed, but lots of false positives are inevitably introduced, too. Consequently, so-called tractography filtering techniques have become increasingly popular to get rid of these false positives and improve specificity. However, increasing number of streamlines introduces redundancy in tractography reconstructions, which may negatively impact the performance of filtering algorithms, especially those based on linear formulations. To address this problem, we introduce a novel streamlines representation, called "blurred streamlines", which drastically reduces the redundancy among streamlines by (i) clustering similar trajectories and (ii) spatially blurring the corresponding signal contributions. We tested the effectiveness of the blurred streamlines both on synthetic and in vivo data. Our results clearly show that this new representation is as accurate as state-of-the-art methods despite using only 5% of the input streamlines, thus significantly decreasing the computational complexity of filtering algorithms as well as storage requirements of the resulting reconstructions.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".