Literature DB >> 31173905

Quantifying performance of machine learning methods for neuroimaging data.

Lee Jollans1, Rory Boyle2, Eric Artiges3, Tobias Banaschewski4, Sylvane Desrivières5, Antoine Grigis6, Jean-Luc Martinot7, Tomáš Paus8, Michael N Smolka9, Henrik Walter10, Gunter Schumann5, Hugh Garavan11, Robert Whelan12.   

Abstract

Machine learning is increasingly being applied to neuroimaging data. However, most machine learning algorithms have not been designed to accommodate neuroimaging data, which typically has many more data points than subjects, in addition to multicollinearity and low signal-to-noise. Consequently, the relative efficacy of different machine learning regression algorithms for different types of neuroimaging data are not known. Here, we sought to quantify the performance of a variety of machine learning algorithms for use with neuroimaging data with various sample sizes, feature set sizes, and predictor effect sizes. The contribution of additional machine learning techniques - embedded feature selection and bootstrap aggregation (bagging) - to model performance was also quantified. Five machine learning regression methods - Gaussian Process Regression, Multiple Kernel Learning, Kernel Ridge Regression, the Elastic Net and Random Forest, were examined with both real and simulated MRI data, and in comparison to standard multiple regression. The different machine learning regression algorithms produced varying results, which depended on sample size, feature set size, and predictor effect size. When the effect size was large, the Elastic Net, Kernel Ridge Regression and Gaussian Process Regression performed well at most sample sizes and feature set sizes. However, when the effect size was small, only the Elastic Net made accurate predictions, but this was limited to analyses with sample sizes greater than 400. Random Forest also produced a moderate performance for small effect sizes, but could do so across all sample sizes. Machine learning techniques also improved prediction accuracy for multiple regression. These data provide empirical evidence for the differential performance of various machines on neuroimaging data, which are dependent on number of sample size, features and effect size.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Machine learning; Neuroimaging; Regression algorithms; Reproducibility

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31173905      PMCID: PMC6688909          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.05.082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   7.400


  74 in total

1.  False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

Authors:  Joseph P Simmons; Leif D Nelson; Uri Simonsohn
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-10-17

Review 2.  The IMAGEN study: reinforcement-related behaviour in normal brain function and psychopathology.

Authors:  G Schumann; E Loth; T Banaschewski; A Barbot; G Barker; C Büchel; P J Conrod; J W Dalley; H Flor; J Gallinat; H Garavan; A Heinz; B Itterman; M Lathrop; C Mallik; K Mann; J-L Martinot; T Paus; J-B Poline; T W Robbins; M Rietschel; L Reed; M Smolka; R Spanagel; C Speiser; D N Stephens; A Ströhle; M Struve
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 15.992

3.  Prediction of illness severity in patients with major depression using structural MR brain scans.

Authors:  Benson Mwangi; Keith Matthews; J Douglas Steele
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 4.  A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics.

Authors:  Yvan Saeys; Iñaki Inza; Pedro Larrañaga
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2007-08-24       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Prediction of individual subject's age across the human lifespan using diffusion tensor imaging: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Benson Mwangi; Khader M Hasan; Jair C Soares
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-03-14       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Inferring mental states from neuroimaging data: from reverse inference to large-scale decoding.

Authors:  Russell A Poldrack
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 7.  Building better biomarkers: brain models in translational neuroimaging.

Authors:  Choong-Wan Woo; Luke J Chang; Martin A Lindquist; Tor D Wager
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 24.884

8.  The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI): MRI methods.

Authors:  Clifford R Jack; Matt A Bernstein; Nick C Fox; Paul Thompson; Gene Alexander; Danielle Harvey; Bret Borowski; Paula J Britson; Jennifer L Whitwell; Chadwick Ward; Anders M Dale; Joel P Felmlee; Jeffrey L Gunter; Derek L G Hill; Ron Killiany; Norbert Schuff; Sabrina Fox-Bosetti; Chen Lin; Colin Studholme; Charles S DeCarli; Gunnar Krueger; Heidi A Ward; Gregory J Metzger; Katherine T Scott; Richard Mallozzi; Daniel Blezek; Joshua Levy; Josef P Debbins; Adam S Fleisher; Marilyn Albert; Robert Green; George Bartzokis; Gary Glover; John Mugler; Michael W Weiner
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Feature Selection Based on Machine Learning in MRIs for Hippocampal Segmentation.

Authors:  Sabina Tangaro; Nicola Amoroso; Massimo Brescia; Stefano Cavuoti; Andrea Chincarini; Rosangela Errico; Paolo Inglese; Giuseppe Longo; Rosalia Maglietta; Andrea Tateo; Giuseppe Riccio; Roberto Bellotti
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 2.238

10.  Detecting Neuroimaging Biomarkers for Psychiatric Disorders: Sample Size Matters.

Authors:  Hugo G Schnack; René S Kahn
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 4.157

View more
  24 in total

1.  Neuroanatomical correlates of impulsive traits in children aged 9 to 10.

Authors:  Max M Owens; Courtland S Hyatt; Joshua C Gray; Joshua D Miller; Donald R Lynam; Sage Hahn; Nicholas Allgaier; Alexandra Potter; Hugh Garavan
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2020-09-07

Review 2.  Toward Addiction Prediction: An Overview of Cross-Validated Predictive Modeling Findings and Considerations for Future Neuroimaging Research.

Authors:  Sarah W Yip; Brian Kiluk; Dustin Scheinost
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging       Date:  2019-11-12

3.  Localized Prediction of Glutamate from Whole-Brain Functional Connectivity of the Pregenual Anterior Cingulate Cortex.

Authors:  Louise Martens; Nils B Kroemer; Vanessa Teckentrup; Lejla Colic; Nicola Palomero-Gallagher; Meng Li; Martin Walter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Individualized Prediction of Females' Empathic Concern from Intrinsic Brain Activity within General Network of State Empathy.

Authors:  Dongfang Zhao; Rui Ding; Huijuan Zhang; Nan Zhang; Li Hu; Wenbo Luo
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  Brain-predicted age difference score is related to specific cognitive functions: a multi-site replication analysis.

Authors:  Rory Boyle; Lee Jollans; Laura M Rueda-Delgado; Rossella Rizzo; Görsev G Yener; Jason P McMorrow; Silvin P Knight; Daniel Carey; Ian H Robertson; Derya D Emek-Savaş; Yaakov Stern; Rose Anne Kenny; Robert Whelan
Journal:  Brain Imaging Behav       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 3.978

Review 6.  Promising vulnerability markers of substance use and misuse: A review of human neurobehavioral studies.

Authors:  Briana Lees; Alexis M Garcia; Jennifer Debenham; Anna E Kirkland; Brittany E Bryant; Louise Mewton; Lindsay M Squeglia
Journal:  Neuropharmacology       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 5.250

7.  Boost in Test-Retest Reliability in Resting State fMRI with Predictive Modeling.

Authors:  Aman Taxali; Mike Angstadt; Saige Rutherford; Chandra Sripada
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  NeuroCrypt: Machine Learning Over Encrypted Distributed Neuroimaging Data.

Authors:  Nipuna Senanayake; Robert Podschwadt; Daniel Takabi; Vince D Calhoun; Sergey M Plis
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2021-05-04

9.  Individual Differences in Cognitive Performance Are Better Predicted by Global Rather Than Localized BOLD Activity Patterns Across the Cortex.

Authors:  Weiqi Zhao; Clare E Palmer; Wesley K Thompson; Bader Chaarani; Hugh P Garavan; B J Casey; Terry L Jernigan; Anders M Dale; Chun Chieh Fan
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 4.861

10.  Bootstrapping promotes the RSFC-behavior associations: An application of individual cognitive traits prediction.

Authors:  Lijiang Wei; Bin Jing; Haiyun Li
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 5.038

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.