Cargando…
Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise
BACKGROUND: The assumption that functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) noise has constant volatility has recently been challenged by studies examining heteroscedasticity arising from head motion and physiological noise. The present study builds on this work using latest methods from the field...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7992030/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2021.02.009 |
_version_ | 1783669293316046848 |
---|---|
author | Leppanen, Jenni Stone, Henry Lythgoe, David J. Williams, Steven Horvath, Blanka |
author_facet | Leppanen, Jenni Stone, Henry Lythgoe, David J. Williams, Steven Horvath, Blanka |
author_sort | Leppanen, Jenni |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The assumption that functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) noise has constant volatility has recently been challenged by studies examining heteroscedasticity arising from head motion and physiological noise. The present study builds on this work using latest methods from the field of financial mathematics to model fMRI noise volatility. METHODS: Multi-echo phantom and human fMRI scans were used and realised volatility was estimated. The Hurst parameter H ∈ (0, 1), which governs the roughness/irregularity of realised volatility time series, was estimated. Calibration of H was performed pathwise, using well-established neural network calibration tools. RESULTS: In all experiments the volatility calibrated to values within the rough case, H < 0.5, and on average fMRI noise was very rough with 0.03 < H < 0.05. Some edge effects were also observed, whereby H was larger near the edges of the phantoms. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that fMRI volatility is not only non-constant, but also substantially more irregular than a standard Brownian motion. Thus, further research is needed to examine the impact such pronounced oscillations in the volatility of fMRI noise have on data analyses. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7992030 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79920302021-05-01 Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise Leppanen, Jenni Stone, Henry Lythgoe, David J. Williams, Steven Horvath, Blanka Magn Reson Imaging Original Contribution BACKGROUND: The assumption that functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) noise has constant volatility has recently been challenged by studies examining heteroscedasticity arising from head motion and physiological noise. The present study builds on this work using latest methods from the field of financial mathematics to model fMRI noise volatility. METHODS: Multi-echo phantom and human fMRI scans were used and realised volatility was estimated. The Hurst parameter H ∈ (0, 1), which governs the roughness/irregularity of realised volatility time series, was estimated. Calibration of H was performed pathwise, using well-established neural network calibration tools. RESULTS: In all experiments the volatility calibrated to values within the rough case, H < 0.5, and on average fMRI noise was very rough with 0.03 < H < 0.05. Some edge effects were also observed, whereby H was larger near the edges of the phantoms. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that fMRI volatility is not only non-constant, but also substantially more irregular than a standard Brownian motion. Thus, further research is needed to examine the impact such pronounced oscillations in the volatility of fMRI noise have on data analyses. Elsevier 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7992030/ /pubmed/33588017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2021.02.009 Text en © 2021 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Contribution Leppanen, Jenni Stone, Henry Lythgoe, David J. Williams, Steven Horvath, Blanka Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title | Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title_full | Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title_fullStr | Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title_full_unstemmed | Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title_short | Sailing in rough waters: Examining volatility of fMRI noise |
title_sort | sailing in rough waters: examining volatility of fmri noise |
topic | Original Contribution |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7992030/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2021.02.009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leppanenjenni sailinginroughwatersexaminingvolatilityoffmrinoise AT stonehenry sailinginroughwatersexaminingvolatilityoffmrinoise AT lythgoedavidj sailinginroughwatersexaminingvolatilityoffmrinoise AT williamssteven sailinginroughwatersexaminingvolatilityoffmrinoise AT horvathblanka sailinginroughwatersexaminingvolatilityoffmrinoise |