Using space-filling curves and fractals to reveal spatial and temporal patterns in neuroimaging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective . Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional MRI (fMRI) and other neuroimaging techniques are routinely used in medical diagnosis, cognitive neuroscience or recently in brain decoding. They produce three- or four-dimensional scans reflecting the geometry of brain tissue or activity, which is highly correlated temporally and spatially. While there exist numerous theoretically guided methods for analyzing correlations in one-dimensional data, they often cannot be readily generalized to the multidimensional geometrically embedded setting. Approach . We present a novel method, Fractal Space-Curve Analysis (FSCA), which combines Space-Filling Curve (SFC) mapping for dimensionality reduction with fractal Detrended Fluctuation Analysis. We conduct extensive feasibility studies on diverse, artificially generated data with known fractal characteristics: the fractional Brownian motion, Cantor sets, and Gaussian processes. We compare the suitability of dimensionality reduction via Hilbert SFC and a data-driven alternative. FSCA is then successfully applied to real-world MRI and fMRI scans. Main results . The method utilizing Hilbert curves is optimized for computational efficiency, proven robust against boundary effects typical in experimental data analysis, and resistant to data sub-sampling. It is able to correctly quantify and discern correlations in both stationary and dynamic two-dimensional images. In MRI Alzheimer’s dataset, patients reveal a progression of the disease associated with a systematic decrease of the Hurst exponent. In fMRI recording of breath-holding task, the change in the exponent allows distinguishing different experimental phases. Significance . This study introduces a robust method for fractal characterization of spatial and temporal correlations in many types of multidimensional neuroimaging data. Very few assumptions allow it to be generalized to more dimensions than typical for neuroimaging and utilized in other scientific fields. The method can be particularly useful in analyzing fMRI experiments to compute markers of pathological conditions resulting from neurodegeneration. We also showcase its potential for providing insights into brain dynamics in task-related experiments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".