Paper detail

Leveraging both Lesion Features and Procedural Bias in Neuroimaging: An Dual-Task Split dynamics of inverse scale space

The prediction and selection of lesion features are two important tasks in voxel-based neuroimage analysis. Existing multivariate learning models take two tasks equivalently and optimize simultaneously. However, in addition to lesion features, we observe that there is another type of feature, which is commonly introduced during the procedure of preprocessing steps, which can improve the prediction result. We call such a type of feature as procedural bias. Therefore, in this paper, we propose that the features/voxels in neuroimage data are consist of three orthogonal parts: lesion features, procedural bias, and null features. To stably select lesion features and leverage procedural bias into prediction, we propose an iterative algorithm (termed GSplit LBI) as a discretization of differential inclusion of inverse scale space, which is the combination of Variable Splitting scheme and Linearized Bregman Iteration (LBI). Specifically, with a variable the splitting term, two estimators are introduced and split apart, i.e. one is for feature selection (the sparse estimator) and the other is for prediction (the dense estimator). Implemented with Linearized Bregman Iteration (LBI), the solution path of both estimators can be returned with different sparsity levels on the sparse estimator for the selection of lesion features. Besides, the dense the estimator can additionally leverage procedural bias to further improve prediction results. To test the efficacy of our method, we conduct experiments on the simulated study and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. The validity and the benefit of our model can be shown by the improvement of prediction results and the interpretability of visualized procedural bias and lesion features.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.