Comparison of two exploratory data analysis methods for fMRI: fuzzy clustering vs. principal component analysis

被引:133
作者
Baumgartner, R [1 ]
Ryner, L [1 ]
Richter, W [1 ]
Summers, R [1 ]
Jarmasz, M [1 ]
Somorjai, R [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Res Council Canada, Inst Biodiagnost, Winnipeg, MB R3B 1Y6, Canada
关键词
functional MR imaging; principal component analysis; fuzzy clustering analysis;
D O I
10.1016/S0730-725X(99)00102-2
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Exploratory data-driven methods such as Fuzzy clustering analysis (FCA) and Principal component analysis (PCA) may be considered as hypothesis-generating procedures that are complementary to the hypothesis-led statistical inferential methods in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Here, a comparison between FCA and PCA is presented in a systematic fMRI study, with MR data acquired under the null condition, i.e., no activation, with different noise contributions and simulated, varying "activation." The contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratio ranged between 1-10. We found that if fMRI data are corrupted by scanner noise only, FCA and PCA show comparable performance. In the presence of other sources of signal variation (e.g., physiological noise), FCA outperforms PCA in the entire CNR range of interest in fMRI, particularly for low CNR values. The comparison method that we introduced may be used to assess other exploratory approaches such as independent component analysis or neural network-based techniques. Crown Copyright (C) 2000. Published by Elsevier Science Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:89 / 94
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
[31]   Principal component analysis with autocorrelated data [J].
Zamprogno, Bartolomeu ;
Reisen, Valderio A. ;
Bondon, Pascal ;
Aranda Cotta, Higor H. ;
Reis Jr, Neyval C. .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL COMPUTATION AND SIMULATION, 2020, 90 (12) :2117-2135
[32]   Synthetic Data by Principal Component Analysis [J].
Sano, Natsuki .
20TH IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA MINING WORKSHOPS (ICDMW 2020), 2020, :101-105
[33]   Comparison of Principal Component Analysis Techniques for PMU Data Event Detection [J].
Souto, L. ;
Melendez, J. ;
Herraiz, S. .
2020 IEEE POWER & ENERGY SOCIETY GENERAL MEETING (PESGM), 2020,
[34]   Principal Component Analysis based Feature Selection for clustering [J].
Xu, Jun-Ling ;
Xu, Bao-Wen ;
Zhang, Wei-Feng ;
Cui, Zi-Feng .
PROCEEDINGS OF 2008 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MACHINE LEARNING AND CYBERNETICS, VOLS 1-7, 2008, :460-+
[35]   Principal Component Analysis and Clustering Based Indoor Localization [J].
Liang, Dong ;
Yang, Jingkang ;
Xuan, Rui ;
Zhang, Zhaojing ;
Yang, Zhifang ;
Shi, Kexin .
2015 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA MINING WORKSHOP (ICDMW), 2015, :1103-1108
[36]   A performance comparison of using principal component analysis and ant clustering with fuzzy c-means and k-harmonic means [J].
Julrode, Phichete ;
Supratid, Siriporn ;
Suksawatchon, Ureerat .
2012 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND CYBERNETICS (CYBERNETICSCOM), 2012, :123-128
[37]   A Clustering Algorithm for Binary Protocol Data Frames Based on Principal Component Analysis and Density Peaks Clustering [J].
Yan, Xiaoyong ;
Li, Qing ;
Tao, Siyu .
2017 17TH IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (ICCT 2017), 2017, :1260-1266
[38]   Exploratory Data Analysis Methods for Comparison of Drug Dissolution Profiles [J].
Enachescu, Denis .
BIOCYBERNETICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2010, 30 (04) :17-27
[39]   Fuzzy Weighted Principal Component Analysis for Anomaly Detection [J].
Wang, Sisi ;
Nie, Feiping ;
Wang, Zheng ;
Wang, Rong ;
Li, Xuelong .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY FROM DATA, 2025, 19 (03)
[40]   Comparison and Empirical Analysis between Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis [J].
Xu, Lu ;
Zhang, Yingying .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2013 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVANCES IN SOCIAL SCIENCE, HUMANITIES, AND MANAGEMENT, 2013, 43 :750-755