Download presentation
1
Signal-to-Noise Ratio & Preprocessing
FMRI Undergraduate Course (PSY 181F) FMRI Graduate Course (NBIO 381, PSY 362) Dr. Scott Huettel, Course Director FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
2
What is signal? What is noise?
Signal, literally: Amount of current in receiver coil Signal, practically: Task-related variability Noise, literally and practically: Non-task-related variability How can we control the amount of signal? Scanner properties (e.g., field strength) Experimental task timing: efficient design Subject compliance with task: through training How can we reduce the noise? Choose good pulse sequences and have stable scanner Minimize head motion, to some degree, with restrictors Effectively preprocess our data FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
3
I. Introduction to SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio)
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
4
Signal, Noise, and the General Linear Model
Amplitude (solve for) Measured Data Noise Design Model Cf. Boynton et al., 1996 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
5
Let’s look at two TRs (#s 45 and 50) of one dataset.
Signal Size in fMRI A 45 50 B Let’s look at two TRs (#s 45 and 50) of one dataset. E C (50-45)/45 D FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
6
Voxel 1 Voxel 2 Voxel 3 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
7
Signal-Noise-Ratio (SNR)
Task-Related Variability Non-task-related Variability FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
8
Differences in SNR FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
9
Effects of SNR: Simulation Data
Hemodynamic response Unit amplitude Flat prestimulus baseline Gaussian Noise Temporally uncorrelated (white) Noise assumed to be constant over epoch SNR varied across simulations Max: 2.0, Min: 0.125 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
10
SNR = 2.0 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
11
SNR = 1.0 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
12
SNR = 0.5 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
13
SNR = 0.25 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
14
SNR = 0.125 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
15
SNR = 4.0 SNR = 2.0 SNR = 1.0 SNR = .5 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
16
What are typical SNRs for fMRI data?
Signal amplitude Percent signal change: 0.2-2% Noise amplitude Percent signal change: 0.5-5% SNR range Total range: <0.1 to 4.0 Typical: 0.2 – 0.5 ?? FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
17
II. Properties of Noise in fMRI
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
18
Types of Noise Thermal noise Power fluctuations
Responsible for variation in background of image Eddy currents, scanner heating Power fluctuations Typically caused by scanner problems Artifact-induced problems Variation in subject cognition Timing of processes Head motion Physiological fluctuations Respiration Cardiac pulsation Differences across brain regions Functional differences Large vessel effects FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
19
Why is noise assumed to be Gaussian?
Central limit theorem If X1 … Xn are a set of independent random variables, each with an arbitrary probability distribution, then the sum of the set of variables (probability density function) will be distributed normally. Note: Gaussian refers to the normal, bell-curve distribution. FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
20
Task-related noise? FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
21
Standard Deviation Image
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
22
Spatial Distribution of Noise
A: Anatomical Image B: Noise image C: Physiological noise D: Motion-related noise E: Phantom (all noise) F: Phantom (Physiological) - Kruger & Glover (2001) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
23
Low and High Frequency Noise
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
24
Noise vs. Variability FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
25
Variability in Subject Behavior: Issues
Cognitive processes are not static May take time to engage Often variable across trials Subjects’ attention/arousal wax and wane Subjects adopt different strategies Feedback- or sequence-based Problem-solving methods Subjects engage in non-task cognition Non-task periods do not have the absence of thinking What can we do about these problems? FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
26
Response Time Variability
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
27
Intersubject Variability
D E F A & B: Responses across subjects for 2 sessions C & D: Responses within single subjects across days E & F: Responses within single subjects within a session - Aguirre et al., 1998 Note: These data were collected using a periodic design that allowed timing of stimulus presentation. This served to exacerbate differences in HDR onset (e.g., some, but not all, subjects timed!). FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
28
Consistency in the HDR FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
29
Potential Corrections for Inter-Subject Variability
Use of individual subject’s hemodynamic responses Corrects for differences in latency/shape HDR-free analysis methods Finite-impulse response (FIR) techniques Use of basis functions to look for task-evoked changes Other measures (e.g., area under the curve) Corrections across subjects Random-effects analyses Use statistical tests across subjects as dependent measure (rather than averaged data) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
30
Spatial Variability? Visual Paradigm Cognitive Paradigm
“The following precautions were taken: the same operators always controlled the scanner, ambient light and sound levels were similar between sessions, and spoken instructions to the subject were always exactly the same. One obvious factor that we could not control was that our subject was always aware that he had performed the task before in the scanner, only under slightly different circumstances. We called this the “Groundhog Day” effect.” McGonigle et al., 2000 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
31
Reducing the threshold gives much less apparent variability.
“A reanalysis…” Reducing the threshold gives much less apparent variability. Smith et al., 2005 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
32
III. Methods for Improving SNR
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
33
Increasing field strength?
SNR = signal / noise SNR increases linearly with field strength Signal increases with square of field strength Noise increases linearly with field strength A 4.0T scanner should have 2.7x SNR of 1.5T scanner T1 and T2* both change with incr. field strength T1 increases, reducing signal recovery (bad) T2* decreases, increasing BOLD contrast (good) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
34
Adapted from Turner, et al. (1993)
fmri-fig jpg Adapted from Turner, et al. (1993) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
35
Measured Effects of Field Strength
SNR increases by less than theoretical prediction Sub-linear increases in SNR; large vessel effects may be independent of field strength Where tested, clear advantages of higher field have been demonstrated But, physiological noise may counteract gains at high field ( > ~4.0T ??, > ~7.0T ??) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
36
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
37
Measured Effects of Field Strength
SNR increases by less than theoretical prediction Sub-linear increases in SNR; large vessel effects may be independent of field strength Where tested, clear advantages of higher field have been demonstrated But, physiological noise may counteract gains at high field ( > ~4.0T ??, > ~7.0T ??) High-field scanning may provide better data from capillaries and small veins FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
38
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
39
Measured Effects of Field Strength
SNR increases by less than theoretical prediction Sub-linear increases in SNR; large vessel effects may be independent of field strength Where tested, clear advantages of higher field have been demonstrated But, physiological noise may counteract gains at high field ( > ~4.0T ??, > ~7.0T ??) High-field scanning may provide better data from capillaries and small veins Increased susceptibility artifacts Some regions (e.g., ventral frontal lobe) may be more distorted at high field FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
40
1.5T 4.0T fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
41
Collect more data? Static signal, variable noise
Assumes that the MR data recorded (on each trial) are composed of a signal + (random) noise Effects of trial averaging (simplest case) Signal is present on every trial, so it remains constant when averaged Noise randomly varies across trials, so it decreases with averaging Thus, SNR increases with averaging FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
42
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
43
Increasing Power increases Spatial Extent
Subject 1 Subject 2 Trials Averaged 4 500 ms 500 ms … 16 36 16-20 s 64 100 144 FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
44
A B FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
45
Effects of Signal-Noise Ratio on extent of activation: Empirical Data
Subject 1 Subject 2 Number of Significant Voxels (Vn) VN = Vmax[1 - e( * N)] Number of Trials Averaged (N) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
46
Active Voxel Simulation
Signal + Noise (SNR = 1.0) 1000 Voxels, 100 Active Signal waveform taken from observed data. Signal amplitude distribution: Gamma (observed). Assumed Gaussian white noise. Noise FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
47
Effects of Signal-Noise Ratio on extent of activation: Simulation Data
SNR = 1.00 SNR = (Young) Number of Activated Voxels SNR = (Old) SNR = 0.25 SNR = 0.15 SNR = 0.10 We conducted a simulation that tested the effects of signal to noise and number of trials averaged upon the spatial extent of activation. We created a virtual brain with 100 active voxels, with voxel amplitude drawn from a distribution modeled on our empirical data. What we found is that, for the number of trials conducted in our study (66 for the elderly and 70 for the young, indicated by arrows), the simulation predicts that we have sufficient power to identify nearly all of the active voxels in the young subjects, but only about 57% of the active voxels in the elderly subjects. That is, the 2 to 1 difference in spatial extent of activation that we measured between our groups appears to be nearly completely a function of the group difference in noise levels. Although we show this for age groups, this effect will occur for any group comparison (such as with patient populations or drug studies) where the groups differ in voxelwise noise levels. Furthermore, consider what would be predicted had we run only 30 trials for each group. At those numbers, our results predict that we would have observed about a 4 to 1 difference in extent of activation. So differences in spatial extent of activation will vary according to the number of trials conducted. Number of Trials Averaged FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
48
Caveats Signal averaging is based on assumptions
Data = signal + temporally invariant noise Noise is uncorrelated over time If assumptions are violated, then pure averaging ignores potentially valuable information Amount of noise varies over time Some noise is temporally correlated (physiology) Same principle holds for more complex analyses: increasing the quantity of data improves SNR FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
49
IV. Preprocessing of FMRI Data
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
50
What is preprocessing? Correcting for non-task-related variability in experimental data Usually done without consideration of experimental design; thus, pre-analysis Occasionally called post-processing, in reference to being after acquisition Attempts to remove, rather than model, data variability FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
51
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
52
A. Quality Assurance fmri-fig-10-02-0.jpg
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
53
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
54
B. Slice Timing Correction
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
55
C. Motion Correction: Good, Bad,…
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
56
… and catastrophically bad
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
57
Why does head motion introduce problems?
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
58
Simulated Head Motion Motion
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
59
Severe Head Motion: Real Data
Two 4s movements of 8mm in -Y direction (during task epochs) Motion FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
60
Correcting Head Motion
Rigid body transformation 6 parameters: 3 translation, 3 rotation Minimization of some cost function E.g., sum of squared differences Mutual information FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
61
Effects of Head Motion Correction
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
62
Limitations of Motion Correction
Artifact-related limitations Loss of data at edges of imaging volume Ghosts in image do not change in same manner as real data Distortions in fMRI images Distortions may be dependent on position in field, not position in head Intrinsic problems with correction of both slice timing and head motion FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
63
What are the best approaches for minimizing the influence of head motion?
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
64
Prevention… fmri-fig-10-07-0.jpg
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
65
… and training! fmri-fig-10-08-0.jpg
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
66
D. Co-Registration and Normalization
Matching two images of the same subject’s brain collected using different pulse sequences. Matching an image from a single subject, typically a high-resolution anatomical, to a template in a standardized space. FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
67
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
68
Standardized Spaces Talairach space (proportional grid system)
From atlas of Talairach and Tournoux (1988) Based on single subject (60y, Female, Cadaver) Single hemisphere First commonly used system Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space Combination of many MRI scans on normal controls All right-handed subjects Approximated to Talairach space Slightly larger Taller from AC by 5mm; deeper from AC by 10mm Used by FSL, SPM, fMRI Data Center, International Consortium for Brain Mapping, many others FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
69
Comparing Talairach and MNI
Images from Cambridge Brain Imaging Unit FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
70
Normalization to Template
Normalization Template Normalized Data SPM FSL FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
71
Anterior and Posterior Commissures
Anterior Commissure Posterior Commissure FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
72
fmri-fig jpg FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
73
When wouldn’t you normalize?
Advantages Allows generalization of results to larger population Improves comparison with other studies Provides coordinate space for reporting results Enables averaging across subjects Other options? Anatomical region-of-interest approach Functional mapping within subjects FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
74
E. Spatial Smoothing Application of Gaussian kernel
Usually expressed in #mm FWHM “Full Width – Half Maximum” Typically ~2 times voxel size FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
75
Effects of Smoothing on Activity
Unsmoothed Data Smoothed Data (kernel width ~12mm) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
76
Before smoothing (hypothetical data)
After smoothing (hypothetical data) FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
77
Should you spatially smooth?
Advantages Increases Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) Matched Filter Theorem: Maximum increase in SNR by filter with same shape/size as signal Reduces number of comparisons Allows application of Gaussian Field Theory May improve comparisons across subjects Signal may be spread widely across cortex, due to intersubject variability Disadvantages Reduces spatial resolution Challenging to smooth accurately if size/shape of signal is not known FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
78
F. Temporal Filtering Identify unwanted frequency variation
Drift (low-frequency) Physiology (high-frequency) Task overlap (high-frequency) Reduce power around those frequencies through application of filters Potential problem: removal of frequencies composing response of interest FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
79
Power Spectra: Frequencies to Eliminate
FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
80
Summary There is sometimes signal in your data.
Try to maximize it! There is always noise in your data. Try to prevent it! …via design, precautions Try to minimize it! …via preprocessing FMRI – Week 7 – SNR & Preprocessing Scott Huettel, Duke University
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.