MVComp toolbox: MultiVariate Comparisons of brain MRI features accounting for common information across measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Multivariate approaches have recently gained in popularity to address the physiological unspecificity of neuroimaging measures and to better characterize the complexity of biological processes underlying behavior. However, commonly used approaches are biased by the intrinsic associations between variables, or they are computationally expensive and may be more complicated to implement than standard univariate approaches. Here, we propose using the Mahalanobis distance (D2), an individual-level measure of deviation relative to a reference distribution that accounts for covariance between measures. To facilitate its use, we introduce an open-source python-based tool for computing D2 relative to a reference group or within a single individual: the MultiVariate Comparison (MVComp) toolbox (https://github.com/neuralabc/mvcomp (https://github.com/neuralabc/mvcomp)). The toolbox allows different levels of analysis (i.e., group- or subject-level), resolutions (e.g., voxel-wise, ROI-wise) and dimensions considered (e.g., combining MRI measures or WM tracts). Several example cases are presented to showcase the wide range of possible applications of MVComp and to demonstrate the functionality of the toolbox. Methods & Results The D2 framework was applied to the assessment of white matter (WM) microstructure at 1) the group-level, where D2 can be computed between a subject and a reference group to yield an individualized measure of deviation. We observed that clustering applied to D2 in the corpus callosum yields parcellations that highly resemble known topography based on neuroanatomy, suggesting that D2 provides an integrative index that meaningfully reflects the underlying microstructure. 2) At the subject level, D2 was computed between voxels to obtain a measure of (dis)similarity. The loadings of each MRI measure (i.e., its relative contribution to D2) were then extracted in voxels of interest to showcase a useful option of the MVComp toolbox. These relative contributions can provide important insights into the physiological underpinnings of differences observed. Discussion Integrative multivariate models are crucial to expand our understanding of the complex brain-behavior relationships and the multiple factors underlying disease development and progression. Our toolbox facilitates the implementation of a useful multivariate method, making it more widely accessible.
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 | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.008 |
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".