1 Data Analysis for fMRI Computational Analyses of Brain Imaging CALD 10-731 and Psychology 85-735 Tom M. Mitchell and Marcel Just January 15, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Road-Sign Detection and Recognition Based on Support Vector Machines Saturnino, Sergio et al. Yunjia Man ECG 782 Dr. Brendan.
Advertisements

A (very) brief introduction to multivoxel analysis “stuff” Jo Etzel, Social Brain Lab
fMRI data analysis at CCBI
Models of Effective Connectivity & Dynamic Causal Modelling
07/01/15 MfD 2014 Xin You Tai & Misun Kim
Hanneke den Ouden Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, UK Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen,
Hidden Process Models with applications to fMRI data Rebecca Hutchinson Oregon State University Joint work with Tom M. Mitchell Carnegie Mellon University.
1 Learning fMRI-Based Classifiers for Cognitive States Stefan Niculescu Carnegie Mellon University April, 2003 Our Group: Tom Mitchell, Luis Barrios, Rebecca.
1 Classifying Instantaneous Cognitive States from fMRI Data Tom Mitchell, Rebecca Hutchinson, Marcel Just, Stefan Niculescu, Francisco Pereira, Xuerui.
1 MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES IN IMAGE PROCESSING By Kaan Tariman M.S. in Computer Science CSCI 8810 Course Project.
Hidden Process Models Rebecca Hutchinson Tom M. Mitchell Indrayana Rustandi October 4, 2006 Women in Machine Learning Workshop Carnegie Mellon University.
1 Automated Feature Abstraction of the fMRI Signal using Neural Network Clustering Techniques Stefan Niculescu and Tom Mitchell Siemens Medical Solutions,
Modeling fMRI data generated by overlapping cognitive processes with unknown onsets using Hidden Process Models Rebecca A. Hutchinson (1) Tom M. Mitchell.
Learning to Identify Overlapping and Hidden Cognitive Processes from fMRI Data Rebecca Hutchinson, Tom Mitchell, Indra Rustandi Carnegie Mellon University.
Rosalyn Moran Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging Institute of Neurology University College London With thanks to the FIL Methods Group for slides and.
1st Level Analysis Design Matrix, Contrasts & Inference
GUIDE to The… D U M M I E S’ DCM Velia Cardin. Functional Specialization is a question of Where? Where in the brain is a certain cognitive/perceptual.
Dynamic Causal Modelling THEORY SPM Course FIL, London October 2009 Hanneke den Ouden Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging Radboud University.
From Localization to Connectivity and... Lei Sheu 1/11/2011.
Dynamic Causal Modelling
Measuring Functional Integration: Connectivity Analyses
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory Demis Hassabis & Hanneke den Ouden Thanks to Klaas Enno Stephan Functional Imaging Lab Wellcome Dept. of Imaging.
FMRI Methods Lecture7 – Review: analyses & statistics.
18 th February 2009 Stephanie Burnett Christian Lambert Methods for Dummies 2009 Dynamic Causal Modelling Part I: Theory.
1 Preliminary Experiments: Learning Virtual Sensors Machine learning approach: train classifiers –fMRI(t, t+  )  CognitiveState Fixed set of possible.
Dynamic Causal Modelling for fMRI Friday 22 nd Oct SPM fMRI course Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging London André Marreiros.
Contrasts & Inference - EEG & MEG Himn Sabir 1. Topics 1 st level analysis 2 nd level analysis Space-Time SPMs Time-frequency analysis Conclusion 2.
FMRI – Week 10 – Analysis II Scott Huettel, Duke University FMRI Data Analysis: II. Advanced Data Analysis FMRI Graduate Course (NBIO 381, PSY 362) Dr.
SPM short course Functional integration and connectivity Christian Büchel Karl Friston The Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology, UCL London UK http//:
Learning to distinguish cognitive subprocesses based on fMRI Tom M. Mitchell Center for Automated Learning and Discovery Carnegie Mellon University Collaborators:
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) Marta I. Garrido Thanks to: Karl J. Friston, Klaas E. Stephan, Andre C. Marreiros, Stefan J. Kiebel,
1 Modeling the fMRI signal via Hierarchical Clustered Hidden Process Models Stefan Niculescu, Tom Mitchell, R. Bharat Rao Siemens Medical Solutions Carnegie.
Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston 18.
Statistical Analysis An Introduction to MRI Physics and Analysis Michael Jay Schillaci, PhD Monday, April 7 th, 2007.
FMRI Modelling & Statistical Inference Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM Course Chicago, Oct.
The General Linear Model
Dynamic Causal Model for evoked responses in MEG/EEG Rosalyn Moran.
The General Linear Model Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM fMRI Course London, May 2012.
SPM short – Mai 2008 Linear Models and Contrasts Stefan Kiebel Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging.
Multimodal Brain Imaging Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College, London Guillaume Flandin, CEA, Paris Nelson Trujillo-Barreto, CNC,
FMRI and Behavioral Studies of Human Face Perception Ronnie Bryan Vision Lab
Analysis of FMRI Data: Principles and Practice Robert W Cox, PhD Scientific and Statistical Computing Core National Institute of Mental Health Bethesda,
Bayesian Inference in SPM2 Will Penny K. Friston, J. Ashburner, J.-B. Poline, R. Henson, S. Kiebel, D. Glaser Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience,
Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) A Practical Perspective Ollie Hulme Barrie Roulston Zeki lab.
The General Linear Model Christophe Phillips SPM Short Course London, May 2013.
The General Linear Model Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM fMRI Course London, October 2012.
Learning to Decode Cognitive States from Brain Images Tom Mitchell et al. Carnegie Mellon University Presented by Bob Stark.
Mihály Bányai, Vaibhav Diwadkar and Péter Érdi
5th March 2008 Andreina Mendez Stephanie Burnett
Nicolas Alzetta CoNGA: Cognition and Neuroscience Group of Antwerp
Effective Connectivity: Basics
Effective Connectivity
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory
Lior Shmuelof, Ehud Zohary  Neuron 
The General Linear Model (GLM)
The General Linear Model
Dynamic Causal Modelling
Introduction to Connectivity Analyses
SPM2: Modelling and Inference
MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES IN IMAGE PROCESSING
Dynamic Causal Modelling
MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES IN IMAGE PROCESSING
Bayesian Methods in Brain Imaging
Effective Connectivity
Lior Shmuelof, Ehud Zohary  Neuron 
Bayesian Inference in SPM2
The General Linear Model
John T. Serences, Geoffrey M. Boynton  Neuron 
Will Penny Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging,
Group DCM analysis for cognitive & clinical studies
Presentation transcript:

1 Data Analysis for fMRI Computational Analyses of Brain Imaging CALD and Psychology Tom M. Mitchell and Marcel Just January 15, 2003

2 Ten Minutes of Activity for One Voxel Indicates experimental condition

3

4 …

5 fMRI Data Visualization [from W. Schneider] Slice View Time Series 3 D view Rendered View Inflated View

6 Many Types of Analysis Transformation from fourier space into spatial images, adjusting for head motion, noise, drift,... (FIASCO, SVM) Warping individual brains to canonical structure (Talairach, AIR, SPM) Identifying voxels activated during task (t-test, F-test,…) Finding temporally correlated voxels (clustering) Factoring signal into few components (PCA, ICA) Modeling temporal evolution of activity (diffeqs, HMMs) Learning classifiers to detect cognitive states (Bayes, SVM) Modeling higher cognitive processes (4CAPS, ACT-R) Combining fMRI with ERP, behavioral data, …

7 Identifying Voxels Activated During Task For each voxel, v i, calculate t statistic comparing activity of v i during task versus rest condition. Retain voxels with t-statistic above some threshold

8 Mental Rotation of Imagined Objects Clock rotation Shephard-Metz rotation both [Just, et al., 2001]

9 “Men listen with only one side of their brains, while women use both” (IU School of Medicine Department of Radiology)  Men listening  Women listening Study of Men and Women Listening

10 Identifying Voxels with Similar Time Courses (functional connectivity)

11 The activation in two cortical areas (parietal/dorsal and inferior temporal/ventral) becomes more synchronized as the object recognition task becomes more difficult. Easier Harder Increase in functional connectivity between parietal and inferior temporal areas with workload (from Diwadkar, Carpenter, & Just, 2001) Figure 7

12 Factoring fMRI Signals into Fewer Components PCA, ICA, SVD, Hidden Units

13 Independent Component Analysis of fMRI time-series ICA discovers statistically independent components that combine to form the observed fMRI signal ICA is a data-driven approach, complementary to hypothesis-driven methods (e.g. GLM) for analyzing fMRI data Finds reduced dimensionality descriptions of poorly understood, high dimensional spaces Requires no a-priori knowledge about hemodynamics, noise models, time-courses of subject stimuli,…

14 (McKeown et al., 1998) Independent Component Analysis of fMRI time-series: data-model

15 fMRI time-series ICA algorithm IC #1 IC #2 IC #T Independent Component Analysis of fMRI Time-series [from W. Schneider]

16 ICA Solution IC1 IC2 Independent Component Analysis of fMRI time-series GLM Solution Images Elia Formisano & Rainer Goebel 2001

17 Advantages of ICA Interpretation of non-explicit condition manipulation –Not just AB type designs –Applications driving, reading, problem solving Identify dimensions of poorly understood spaces –Reduce high dimension data to few components –Applications: structure of semantic memory, processes underlying visual scene analysis in visual cortex

18 Learning Classifiers to Decode Cognitive States from fMRI Bayes classifiers, SVM’s, kNN, …

19 Study 1: Word Categories Family members Occupations Tools Kitchen items Dwellings Building parts 4 legged animals Fish Trees Flowers Fruits Vegetables [Francisco Pereira et al.]

20 Training Classifier for Word Categories Learn fMRI(t)  word-category(t) –fMRI(t) = 8470 to 11,136 voxels, depending on subject Feature selection: Select n voxels –Best single-voxel classifiers –Strongest contrast between fixation and some word category –Strongest contrast, spread equally over ROI’s –Randomly Training method: –train ten single-subect classifiers –Gaussian Naïve Bayes  P(fMRI(t) | word-category)

21 Results Classifier outputs ranked list of classes Evaluate by the fraction of classes ranked ahead of true class 0=perfect, 0.5=random, 1.0 unbelievably poor

22 Impact of Feature Selection

23

24 Summary Able to classify instantaneous cognitive state –in contrast to describing average activity over time Significance –Virtual sensors for mental states –Step toward modeling sequential cognitive processes? –Potential clinical applications: diagnosis = classification

25 Modeling temporal evolution of activity HMMs, Diffeqs, …

26 Challenge: learn process model -- HMM’s? a=6,… 3x+a=2 recall correctrecall erroranswer transform correct transform error read problem time  start …

27 V1 V4 BA37 STG BA39 Perturbing inputs Stimuli-bound u 1 (t) {e.g. visual words} DCM [Friston 2002] Aim: Functional integration and the modulation of specific pathways yyyyy Contextual inputs Stimulus-free - u 2 (t) {e.g. cognitive set/time}

28 yyy Hemodynamic model The DCM and its bilinear approximation [Friston 02] Input u(t) activity x 1 (t) activity x 3 (t) activity x 2 (t) The bilinear model neuronal changes intrinsic connectivity induced response induced connectivity

29 Constraints on Connections Hemodynamic parameters Applications Simulations Plasticity in single word processing Attentional modulation of coupling Models of Hemodynamics in a single region Neuronal interactions Overview [Friston, 2002] Bayesian estimation

30 Cognitive Models Grounded in fMRI Data

31 4CAPS Model of Language Processing [Just, et al., 2002]

32 The player was followed by the parent. [Just, et al., 2002]

33 4 4CAPS Prediction offMRIActivity Figure 10 Model CU transform CU in 4CAPS comprehension model components fMRI data Model prediction

34 [Anderson, Qin, & Sohn, 2002]

35 Cognitive model: Observed image sequence: See word Recognize word Understand statement Answer question Hypothesized intermediate states, representations, processes: time  Understand question What We’d Like

36 Machine Learning Problems Learn f: image(t)  cognitiveState(t) Discover useful intermediate abstractions Learn process models