Bayesian kernel methods for analysis of functional neuroimages

被引:11
作者
Lukic, Ana S.
Wernick, Miles N. [1 ]
Tzikas, Dimitris G.
Chen, Xu
Likas, Aristidis
Galatsanos, Nikolas P.
Yang, Yongyi
Zhao, Fuqiang
Strother, Stephen C.
机构
[1] IIT, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Chicago, IL 60616 USA
[2] IIT, Med Imaging Res Ctr, Chicago, IL 60616 USA
[3] IIT, Dept Biomed Engn, Chicago, IL 60616 USA
[4] Univ Ioannina, Dept Comp Sci, GR-45110 Ioannina, Greece
[5] Baycrest & Univ Toronto, Rotman Res Inst, Toronto, ON M6A 2E1, Canada
[6] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Neurobiol, Pittsburgh, PA 15203 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
functional neuroimaging; kernel methods; relevance vector machine (RVM); reversible-jump Markov-chain Monte-Carlo (RJMCMC);
D O I
10.1109/TMI.2007.896934
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
We propose an approach to analyzing functional neuroimages in which 1) regions of neuronal activation are described by a superposition of spatial kernel functions, the parameters of which are estimated from the data and 2) the presence of activation is detected by means of a generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT). Kernel methods have become a staple of modern machine learning. Herein, we show that these techniques show promise for neuroimage analysis. In an on-off design, we model the spatial activation pattern as a sum of an unknown number of kernel functions of unknown location, amplitude, and/or size. We employ two Bayesian methods of estimating the kernel functions. The first is a maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation method based on a Reversible-Jump Markov-chain Monte-Carlo (RJMCMC) algorithm that searches for both the appropriate model complexity and parameter values. The second is a relevance vector machine (RVM), a kernel machine that is known to be effective in controlling model complexity (and thus discouraging overfitting). In each method, after estimating the activation pattern, we test for local activation using a GLRT. We evaluate the results using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for simulated neuroimaging data and example results for real fMRI data. We find that, while RVM and RJMCMC both produce good results, RVM requires far less computation time, and thus appears to be the more promising of the two approaches.
引用
收藏
页码:1613 / 1624
页数:12
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Methods to detect objects in photon-limited images [J].
Abu-Naser, A ;
Galatsanos, NP ;
Wernick, MN .
JOURNAL OF THE OPTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA A-OPTICS IMAGE SCIENCE AND VISION, 2006, 23 (02) :272-278
[2]  
Adler R. J., 1981, GEOMETRY RANDOM FIEL
[3]   An introduction to MCMC for machine learning [J].
Andrieu, C ;
de Freitas, N ;
Doucet, A ;
Jordan, MI .
MACHINE LEARNING, 2003, 50 (1-2) :5-43
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1998, FUNDEMENTALS STAT SI
[5]  
Berger JO., 1985, STAT DECISION THEORY, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-1-4757-4286-2
[6]  
Bibby J, MULTIVARIATE ANAL
[7]  
Bishop CM., 1995, Neural networks for pattern recognition
[8]   fMRI signal restoration using a spatio-temporal Markov random field preserving transitions [J].
Descombes, X ;
Kruggel, F ;
von Cramon, DY .
NEUROIMAGE, 1998, 8 (04) :340-349
[9]  
Everitt BS, 1999, HUM BRAIN MAPP, V7, P1
[10]  
Friston K.J., 1994, HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING, V1, P214, DOI 10.1002/hbm.460010306