FMRIPrep: a robust preprocessing pipeline for functional MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preprocessing of functional MRI (fMRI) involves numerous steps to clean and standardize data before statistical analysis. Generally, researchers create ad hoc preprocessing workflows for each new dataset, building upon a large inventory of tools available for each step. The complexity of these workflows has snowballed with rapid advances in MR data acquisition and image processing techniques. We introduce fMRIPrep, an analysis-agnostic tool that addresses the challenge of robust and reproducible preprocessing for task-based and resting fMRI data. FMRIPrep automatically adapts a best-in-breed workflow to the idiosyncrasies of virtually any dataset, ensuring high-quality preprocessing with no manual intervention. By introducing visual assessment checkpoints into an iterative integration framework for software-testing, we show that fMRIPrep robustly produces high-quality results on a diverse fMRI data collection comprising participants from 54 different studies in the OpenfMRI repository. We review the distinctive features of fMRIPrep in a qualitative comparison to other preprocessing workflows. We demonstrate that fMRIPrep achieves higher spatial accuracy as it introduces less uncontrolled spatial smoothness than commonly used preprocessing tools. FMRIPrep has the potential to transform fMRI research by equipping neuroscientists with a high-quality, robust, easy-to-use and transparent preprocessing workflow which can help ensure the validity of inference and the interpretability of their results.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.031 |
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".