4.7 Article

Quantitative prediction of subjective pain intensity from whole-brain fMRI data using Gaussian processes

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 2178-2189

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.072

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Supervised machine learning (ML) algorithms are increasingly popular tools for fMRI decoding due to their predictive capability and their ability to capture information encoded by spatially correlated voxels. In addition, an important secondary Outcome is a multivariate representation of the pattern underlying the prediction Despite an impressive array of applications, most fMRI applications are framed as classification problems and predictions are limited to categorical class decisions For many applications, quantitative predictions are desirable that more accurately represent variability within subject groups and that can be correlated with behavioural variables. We evaluate the predictive capability of Gaussian process (GP) models for two types of quantitative prediction (multivariate regression and probabilistic classification) using whole-brain fMRI volumes. As a proof of concept, we apply GP models to an fMRI experiment investigating subjective responses to thermal pain and show GP models predict subjective pain ratings Without requiring anatomical hypotheses about functional localisation of relevant brain processes Even in the case of pain perception, where strong hypotheses do exist, GP predictions were more accurate than any region previously demonstrated to encode pain intensity We demonstrate two brain mapping methods suitable for GP models and we show that GP regression models outperform state of the art support vector- and relevance vector regression. For classification, GP models perform categorical prediction as accurately as a support vector machine classifier and furnish probabilistic class predictions (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据