MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400480052 · doi:10.59275/j.melba.2024-3d4e

Automatic rating of incomplete hippocampal inversions evaluated across multiple cohorts

2024· preprint· en· W4400480052 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Machine Learning for Biomedical Imaging · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilFédération pour la Recherche sur le CerveauCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisUniversité de LausanneHôpitaux Universitaires de GenèveFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMission Interministérielle de Lutte Contre les Drogues et les Conduites AddictivesScience Foundation IrelandÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneAgence Nationale de la RechercheEuropean CommissionInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)Deutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversité de GenèveKing's College LondonBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNational Institutes of HealthFondation de l'Avenir pour la Recherche Médicale AppliquéeInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleUniversity of Oxford
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPopulationRegressionCohortGeneralizationComputer sciencePsychologyMedicinePathologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incomplete Hippocampal Inversion (IHI), sometimes called hippocampal malrotation, is an atypical anatomical pattern of the hippocampus found in about 20% of the general population. IHI can be visually assessed on coronal slices of T1 weighted MR images, using a composite score that combines four anatomical criteria. IHI has been associated with several brain disorders (epilepsy, schizophrenia). However, these studies were based on small samples. Furthermore, the factors (genetic or environmental) that contribute to the genesis of IHI are largely unknown. Large-scale studies are thus needed to further understand IHI and their potential relationships to neurological and psychiatric disorders. However, visual evaluation is long and tedious, justifying the need for an automatic method. In this paper, we propose, for the first time, to automatically rate IHI. We proceed by predicting four anatomical criteria, which are then summed up to form the IHI score, providing the advantage of an interpretable score. We provided an extensive experimental investigation of different machine learning methods and training strategies. We performed automatic rating using a variety of deep learning models ("conv5-FC3", ResNet and "SECNN") as well as a ridge regression. We studied the generalization of our models using different cohorts and performed multi-cohort learning. We relied on a large population of 2,008 participants from the IMAGEN study, 993 and 403 participants from the QTIM and QTAB studies as well as 985 subjects from the UKBiobank. We showed that deep learning models outperformed a ridge regression. We demonstrated that the performances of the "conv5-FC3" network were at least as good as more complex networks while maintaining a low complexity and computation time. We showed that training on a single cohort may lack in variability while training on several cohorts improves generalization (acceptable performances on all tested cohorts including some that are not included in training). The trained models are available at https://github.com/LisaHemforth/AutomaticIHIRating.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
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 score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.299 · 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