The Imaging Database for Epilepsy And Surgery (<scp>IDEAS</scp>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a crucial tool for identifying brain abnormalities in a wide range of neurological disorders. In focal epilepsy, MRI is used to identify structural cerebral abnormalities. For covert lesions, machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms may improve lesion detection if abnormalities are not evident on visual inspection. The success of this approach depends on the volume and quality of training data. METHODS: Herein, we release an open-source data set of pre-processed MRI scans from 442 individuals with drug-refractory focal epilepsy who had neurosurgical resections and detailed demographic information. We also share scans from 100 healthy controls acquired on the same scanners. The MRI scan data include the preoperative three-dimensional (3D) T1 and, where available, 3D fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR), as well as a manually inspected complete surface reconstruction and volumetric parcellations. Demographic information includes age, sex, age a onset of epilepsy, location of surgery, histopathology of resected specimen, occurrence and frequency of focal seizures with and without impairment of awareness, focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, number of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) at time of surgery, and a total of 1764 patient years of post-surgical followup. Crucially, we also include resection masks delineated from post-surgical imaging. RESULTS: To demonstrate the veracity of our data, we successfully replicated previous studies showing long-term outcomes of seizure freedom in the range of ~50%. Our imaging data replicate findings of group-level atrophy in patients compared to controls. Resection locations in the cohort were predominantly in the temporal and frontal lobes. SIGNIFICANCE: We envisage that our data set, shared openly with the community, will catalyze the development and application of computational methods in clinical neurology.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.044 |
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".