Detecting connectivity: MS lesions, cortical thickness, in addition to the “bubbles” task i

Detecting connectivity: MS lesions, cortical thickness, in addition to the “bubbles” task i www.phwiki.com

Detecting connectivity: MS lesions, cortical thickness, in addition to the “bubbles” task i

Thompson, Clive, Contributing Editor has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Detecting connectivity: MS lesions, cortical thickness, in addition to the “bubbles” task in the fMRI scanner Keith Worsley, McGill ( in addition to Chicago) Nicholas Cham in addition to y, McGill in addition to Google Jonathan Taylor, Université de Montréal in addition to Stan as long as d Robert Adler, Technion Philippe Schyns, Fraser Smith, Glasgow Frédéric Gosselin, Université de Montréal Arnaud Charil, Alan Evans, Montreal Neurological Institute Oury’s course, lecture 2 What is ‘bubbles’ Nature (2005)

Levittown Beauty Academy PA www.phwiki.com

This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal

Subject is shown one of 40 faces chosen at r in addition to om Happy Sad Fearful Neutral but face is only revealed through r in addition to om ‘bubbles’ First trial: “Sad” expression Subject is asked the expression: “Neutral” Response: Incorrect Sad 75 r in addition to om bubble centres Smoothed by a Gaussian ‘bubble’ What the subject sees Your turn Trial 2 Subject response: “Fearful” CORRECT

Your turn Trial 3 Subject response: “Happy” INCORRECT (Fearful) Your turn Trial 4 Subject response: “Happy” CORRECT Your turn Trial 5 Subject response: “Fearful” CORRECT

Your turn Trial 6 Subject response: “Sad” CORRECT Your turn Trial 7 Subject response: “Happy” CORRECT Your turn Trial 8 Subject response: “Neutral” CORRECT

Your turn Trial 9 Subject response: “Happy” CORRECT Your turn Trial 3000 Subject response: “Happy” INCORRECT (Fearful) Bubbles analysis E.g. Fearful (3000/4=750 trials): Trial 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + + 750 = Sum Correct trials Proportion of correct bubbles =(sum correct bubbles) /(sum all bubbles) Thresholded at proportion of correct trials=0.68, scaled to [0,1] Use this as a bubble mask

Results Mask average face But are these features real or just noise Need statistics Happy Sad Fearful Neutral Statistical analysis Correlate bubbles with response (correct = 1, incorrect = 0), separately as long as each expression Equivalent to 2-sample Z-statistic as long as correct vs. incorrect bubbles, e.g. Fearful: Very similar to the proportion of correct bubbles: Response 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 750 Z~N(0,1) statistic Results Thresholded at Z=1.64 (P=0.05) Multiple comparisons correction Need r in addition to om field theory Average face Happy Sad Fearful Neutral Z~N(0,1) statistic

Results, corrected as long as search R in addition to om field theory threshold: Z=3.92 (P=0.05) 3.82 3.80 3.81 3.80 Saddle-point approx (Cham in addition to y, 2007): Z= (P=0.05) Bonferroni: Z=4.87 (P=0.05) – nothing Average face Happy Sad Fearful Neutral Z~N(0,1) statistic Scale Separate analysis of the bubbles at each scale Scale space: smooth Z(s) with range of filter widths w = continuous wavelet trans as long as m adds an extra dimension to the r in addition to om field: Z(s,w) 15mm signal is best detected with a 15mm smoothing filter -2 0 2 4 6 8 Scale space, no signal 6.8 10.2 15.2 22.7 34 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -2 0 2 4 6 8 One 15mm signal 6.8 10.2 15.2 22.7 34 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 w = FWHM (mm, on log scale) s (mm) Z(s,w)

-2 0 2 4 6 8 10mm in addition to 23mm signals 6.8 10.2 15.2 22.7 34 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -2 0 2 4 6 8 Two 10mm signals 20mm apart 6.8 10.2 15.2 22.7 34 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 w = FWHM (mm, on log scale) s (mm) But if the signals are too close together t

Thompson, Clive Wired Magazine Contributing Editor www.phwiki.com

Thresholding Thresholding in advance is vital, since we cannot store all the ~1 billion 5D Z values Resels = (image resels = 146.2) × (fMRI resels = 1057.2) as long as P=0.05, threshold is Z = 6.22 (approx) Only keep 5D local maxima Z(pixel, voxel) > Z(pixel, 6 neighbours of voxel) > Z(4 neighbours of pixel, voxel) Generalised linear models The r in addition to om response is Y=1 (correct) or 0 (incorrect), or Y=fMRI The regressors are Xj=bubble mask at pixel j, j=1 240×380=91200 (!) Logistic regression or ordinary regression: logit(E(Y)) or E(Y) = b0+X1b1+ +X91200b91200 But there are only n=3000 observations (trials) Instead, since regressors are independent, fit them one at a time: logit(E(Y)) or E(Y) = b0+Xjbj However the regressors (bubbles) are r in addition to om with a simple known distribution, so turn the problem around in addition to condition on Y: E(Xj) = c0+Ycj Equivalent to conditional logistic regression (Cox, 1962) which gives exact inference as long as b1 conditional on sufficient statistics as long as b0 Cox also suggested using saddle-point approximations to improve accuracy of inference Interactions logit(E(Y)) or E(Y)=b0+X1b1+ +X91200b91200+X1X2b1,2+ MS lesions in addition to cortical thickness Idea: MS lesions interrupt neuronal signals, causing thinning in down-stream cortex Data: n = 425 mild MS patients 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 Average cortical thickness (mm) Total lesion volume (cc) Correlation = -0.568, T = -14.20 (423 df)

MS lesions in addition to cortical thickness at all pairs of points Dominated by total lesions in addition to average cortical thickness, so remove these effects as follows: CT = cortical thickness, smoothed 20mm ACT = average cortical thickness LD = lesion density, smoothed 10mm TLV = total lesion volume Find partial correlation(LD, CT-ACT) removing TLV via linear model: CT-ACT ~ 1 + TLV + LD test as long as LD Repeat as long as all voxels in 3D, nodes in 2D ~1 billion correlations, so thresholding essential! Look as long as high negative correlations Threshold: P=0.05, c=0.300, T=6.48 Cluster extent rather than peak height (Friston, 1994) Choose a lower level, e.g. t=3.11 (P=0.001) Find clusters i.e. connected components of excursion set Measure cluster extent by resels Distribution: fit a quadratic to the peak: Distribution of maximum cluster extent: Bonferroni on N = clusters ~ E(EC). Z s t Peak height extent D=1

Thompson, Clive Contributing Editor

Thompson, Clive is from United States and they belong to Wired Magazine and they are from  San Francisco, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Thompson, Clive deal with the subjects like Computers; Information Technology Industry

Journal Ratings by Levittown Beauty Academy

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Levittown Beauty Academy and short form of this particular Institution is PA and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.