Cargando…

Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?

Analysis and interpretation of neuroimaging data often require one to divide the brain into a number of regions, or parcels, with homogeneous characteristics, be these regions defined in the brain volume or on the cortical surface. While predefined brain atlases do not adapt to the signal in the ind...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thirion, Bertrand, Varoquaux, Gaël, Dohmatob, Elvis, Poline, Jean-Baptiste
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4076743/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25071425
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00167
_version_ 1782323523498278912
author Thirion, Bertrand
Varoquaux, Gaël
Dohmatob, Elvis
Poline, Jean-Baptiste
author_facet Thirion, Bertrand
Varoquaux, Gaël
Dohmatob, Elvis
Poline, Jean-Baptiste
author_sort Thirion, Bertrand
collection PubMed
description Analysis and interpretation of neuroimaging data often require one to divide the brain into a number of regions, or parcels, with homogeneous characteristics, be these regions defined in the brain volume or on the cortical surface. While predefined brain atlases do not adapt to the signal in the individual subject images, parcellation approaches use brain activity (e.g., found in some functional contrasts of interest) and clustering techniques to define regions with some degree of signal homogeneity. In this work, we address the question of which clustering technique is appropriate and how to optimize the corresponding model. We use two principled criteria: goodness of fit (accuracy), and reproducibility of the parcellation across bootstrap samples. We study these criteria on both simulated and two task-based functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging datasets for the Ward, spectral and k-means clustering algorithms. We show that in general Ward’s clustering performs better than alternative methods with regard to reproducibility and accuracy and that the two criteria diverge regarding the preferred models (reproducibility leading to more conservative solutions), thus deferring the practical decision to a higher level alternative, namely the choice of a trade-off between accuracy and stability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4076743
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40767432014-07-28 Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations? Thirion, Bertrand Varoquaux, Gaël Dohmatob, Elvis Poline, Jean-Baptiste Front Neurosci Neuroscience Analysis and interpretation of neuroimaging data often require one to divide the brain into a number of regions, or parcels, with homogeneous characteristics, be these regions defined in the brain volume or on the cortical surface. While predefined brain atlases do not adapt to the signal in the individual subject images, parcellation approaches use brain activity (e.g., found in some functional contrasts of interest) and clustering techniques to define regions with some degree of signal homogeneity. In this work, we address the question of which clustering technique is appropriate and how to optimize the corresponding model. We use two principled criteria: goodness of fit (accuracy), and reproducibility of the parcellation across bootstrap samples. We study these criteria on both simulated and two task-based functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging datasets for the Ward, spectral and k-means clustering algorithms. We show that in general Ward’s clustering performs better than alternative methods with regard to reproducibility and accuracy and that the two criteria diverge regarding the preferred models (reproducibility leading to more conservative solutions), thus deferring the practical decision to a higher level alternative, namely the choice of a trade-off between accuracy and stability. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4076743/ /pubmed/25071425 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00167 Text en Copyright © 2014 Thirion, Varoquaux, Dohmatob and Poline. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Thirion, Bertrand
Varoquaux, Gaël
Dohmatob, Elvis
Poline, Jean-Baptiste
Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title_full Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title_fullStr Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title_full_unstemmed Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title_short Which fMRI clustering gives good brain parcellations?
title_sort which fmri clustering gives good brain parcellations?
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4076743/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25071425
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00167
work_keys_str_mv AT thirionbertrand whichfmriclusteringgivesgoodbrainparcellations
AT varoquauxgael whichfmriclusteringgivesgoodbrainparcellations
AT dohmatobelvis whichfmriclusteringgivesgoodbrainparcellations
AT polinejeanbaptiste whichfmriclusteringgivesgoodbrainparcellations