4.7 Review

Partial Least Squares (PLS) methods for neuroimaging: A tutorial and review

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 56, Issue 2, Pages 455-475

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.07.034

Keywords

Partial least squares correlation; Partial least squares regression; Partial least squares path modeling; PLS; Symmetric PLS; Asymmetric PLS; Task PLS; Behavior PLS; Seed PLS; Multi-block PLS; Multi-table PLS; Canonical variate analysis; Co-inertia analysis; Multiple factor analysis; STATIS; Barycentric discriminant analysis; Multiple factor analysis; Common factor analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Partial Least Squares (PLS) methods are particularly suited to the analysis of relationships between measures of brain activity and of behavior or experimental design. In neuroimaging, PLS refers to two related methods: (1) symmetric PLS or Partial Least Squares Correlation (PLSC), and (2) asymmetric PLS or Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR). The most popular (by far) version of PLS for neuroimaging is PLSC. It exists in several varieties based on the type of data that are related to brain activity: behavior PLSC analyzes the relationship between brain activity and behavioral data, task PLSC analyzes how brain activity relates to predefined categories or experimental design, seed PLSC analyzes the pattern of connectivity between brain regions, and multi-block or multi-table PLSC integrates one or more of these varieties in a common analysis. PLSR, in contrast to PLSC, is a predictive technique which, typically, predicts behavior (or design) from brain activity. For both PLS methods, statistical inferences are implemented using cross-validation techniques to identify significant patterns of voxel activation. This paper presents both PLS methods and illustrates them with small numerical examples and typical applications in neuroimaging. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available