BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Elina Thibeau-Sutre

Elina Thibeau-Sutre contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningComputer VisionArtificial Intelligenceeess.IVNeurons and CognitionOther Quantitative BiologyQuantitative Methods

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Data Augmentation in High Dimensional Low Sample Size Setting Using a Geometry-Based Variational Autoencoder

In this paper, we propose a new method to perform data augmentation in a reliable way in the High Dimensional Low Sample Size (HDLSS) setting using a geometry-based variational autoencoder. Our approach combines a proper latent space modeling of the VAE seen as a Riemannian manifold with a new generation scheme which produces more meaningful samples especially in the context of small data sets. The proposed method is tested through a wide experimental study where its robustness to data sets, classifiers and training samples size is stressed. It is also validated on a medical imaging classification task on the challenging ADNI database where a small number of 3D brain MRIs are considered and augmented using the proposed VAE framework. In each case, the proposed method allows for a significant and reliable gain in the classification metrics. For instance, balanced accuracy jumps from 66.3% to 74.3% for a state-of-the-art CNN classifier trained with 50 MRIs of cognitively normal (CN) and 50 Alzheimer disease (AD) patients and from 77.7% to 86.3% when trained with 243 CN and 210 AD while improving greatly sensitivity and specificity metrics.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Interpretability of Machine Learning Methods Applied to Neuroimaging

Deep learning methods have become very popular for the processing of natural images, and were then successfully adapted to the neuroimaging field. As these methods are non-transparent, interpretability methods are needed to validate them and ensure their reliability. Indeed, it has been shown that deep learning models may obtain high performance even when using irrelevant features, by exploiting biases in the training set. Such undesirable situations can potentially be detected by using interpretability methods. Recently, many methods have been proposed to interpret neural networks. However, this domain is not mature yet. Machine learning users face two major issues when aiming to interpret their models: which method to choose, and how to assess its reliability? Here, we aim at providing answers to these questions by presenting the most common interpretability methods and metrics developed to assess their reliability, as well as their applications and benchmarks in the neuroimaging context. Note that this is not an exhaustive survey: we aimed to focus on the studies which we found to be the most representative and relevant.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Reproducibility in machine learning for medical imaging

Reproducibility is a cornerstone of science, as the replication of findings is the process through which they become knowledge. It is widely considered that many fields of science are undergoing a reproducibility crisis. This has led to the publications of various guidelines in order to improve research reproducibility. This didactic chapter intends at being an introduction to reproducibility for researchers in the field of machine learning for medical imaging. We first distinguish between different types of reproducibility. For each of them, we aim at defining it, at describing the requirements to achieve it and at discussing its utility. The chapter ends with a discussion on the benefits of reproducibility and with a plea for a non-dogmatic approach to this concept and its implementation in research practice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Convolutional Neural Networks for Classification of Alzheimer's Disease: Overview and Reproducible Evaluation

Over 30 papers have proposed to use convolutional neural network (CNN) for AD classification from anatomical MRI. However, the classification performance is difficult to compare across studies due to variations in components such as participant selection, image preprocessing or validation procedure. Moreover, these studies are hardly reproducible because their frameworks are not publicly accessible and because implementation details are lacking. Lastly, some of these papers may report a biased performance due to inadequate or unclear validation or model selection procedures. In the present work, we aim to address these limitations through three main contributions. First, we performed a systematic literature review and found that more than half of the surveyed papers may have suffered from data leakage. Our second contribution is the extension of our open-source framework for classification of AD using CNN and T1-weighted MRI. Finally, we used this framework to rigorously compare different CNN architectures. The data was split into training/validation/test sets at the very beginning and only the training/validation sets were used for model selection. To avoid any overfitting, the test sets were left untouched until the end of the peer-review process. Overall, the different 3D approaches (3D-subject, 3D-ROI, 3D-patch) achieved similar performances while that of the 2D slice approach was lower. Of note, the different CNN approaches did not perform better than a SVM with voxel-based features. The different approaches generalized well to similar populations but not to datasets with different inclusion criteria or demographical characteristics.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access