Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses
Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the com...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PLoS computational biology 2019-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e1006397 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | e1006397 |
container_title | PLoS computational biology |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Lage-Castellanos, Agustin Valente, Giancarlo Formisano, Elia De Martino, Federico |
description | Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the computations underlying the brain function that is being considered. However, the prediction accuracy is bounded by the proportion of the variance of the brain response which is related to the measurement noise and not to the stimuli (or cognitive functions). This bound to the performance of a computational model has been referred to as the noise ceiling. In previous fMRI applications two methods have been proposed to estimate the noise ceiling based on either a split-half procedure or Monte Carlo simulations. These methods make different assumptions over the nature of the effects underlying the data, and, importantly, their relation has not been clarified yet. Here, we derive an analytical form for the noise ceiling that does not require computationally expensive simulations or a splitting procedure that reduce the amount of data. The validity of this analytical definition is proved in simulations, we show that the analytical solution results in the same estimate of the noise ceiling as the Monte Carlo method. Considering different simulated noise structure, we evaluate different estimators of the variance of the responses and their impact on the estimation of the noise ceiling. We furthermore evaluate the interplay between regularization (often used to estimate model fits to the data when the number of computational features in the model is large) and model complexity on the performance with respect to the noise ceiling. Our results indicate that when considering the variance of the responses across runs, computing the noise ceiling analytically results in similar estimates as the split half estimator and approaches the true noise ceiling under a variety of simulated noise scenarios. Finally, the methods are tested on real fMRI data acquired at 7 Tesla. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006397 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2250643262</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A581096327</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ce58c68f39cf4aab87694315681f39a4</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A581096327</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c699t-6db188b24e5936130fc425bca4d01cfc771da2ababa7f1810eeece170b406ec53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkktv1DAQxyMEog_4BggicSmHXez4EfuCVFU8VmpBKiCOluOMd72K49ROUPn2eNm06iIuaA62Zn7zn4emKF5gtMSkxm-3YYq97paDadwSI8SJrB8Vx5gxsqgJE48f_I-Kk5S2COWv5E-LI4IElajGx8WPKxg3oU2lDbE0wQ_T6Pp1OW6g9PrW-cmXA8Qc9Lo3UAY7Q3p0IVcvfWihSzu_vbpelRHSEPoE6VnxxOouwfP5PS2-f3j_7eLT4vLLx9XF-eXCcCnHBW8bLERTUWCScEyQNbRijdG0RdhYU9e41ZVustUWC4wAwACuUUMRB8PIafFqrzt0Ial5J0lVFUOckopXmVjtiTborRqi8zr-UkE79ccR4lrpODrTgTLAhOHCEmks1boRNZeUYMYFzj5Ns9a7udrUeGgN9GPU3YHoYaR3G7UOPxWnuRWOssDZLBDDzQRpVN4lA12newhT7hsLyShnSGb09V_ov6db7qm1zgO43oZc12RrwTsTerAu-89ZXp3kpKpzwpuDhMyMcDuu9ZSSWn29_g_28yFL96yJIaUI9n4rGKndwd61r3YHq-aDzWkvH270PunuQslvY0voWA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2250643262</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>NCBI_PubMed Central(免费)</source><source>PLoS_OA刊</source><source>Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin ; Valente, Giancarlo ; Formisano, Elia ; De Martino, Federico</creator><contributor>Diedrichsen, Jörn</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin ; Valente, Giancarlo ; Formisano, Elia ; De Martino, Federico ; Diedrichsen, Jörn</creatorcontrib><description>Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the computations underlying the brain function that is being considered. However, the prediction accuracy is bounded by the proportion of the variance of the brain response which is related to the measurement noise and not to the stimuli (or cognitive functions). This bound to the performance of a computational model has been referred to as the noise ceiling. In previous fMRI applications two methods have been proposed to estimate the noise ceiling based on either a split-half procedure or Monte Carlo simulations. These methods make different assumptions over the nature of the effects underlying the data, and, importantly, their relation has not been clarified yet. Here, we derive an analytical form for the noise ceiling that does not require computationally expensive simulations or a splitting procedure that reduce the amount of data. The validity of this analytical definition is proved in simulations, we show that the analytical solution results in the same estimate of the noise ceiling as the Monte Carlo method. Considering different simulated noise structure, we evaluate different estimators of the variance of the responses and their impact on the estimation of the noise ceiling. We furthermore evaluate the interplay between regularization (often used to estimate model fits to the data when the number of computational features in the model is large) and model complexity on the performance with respect to the noise ceiling. Our results indicate that when considering the variance of the responses across runs, computing the noise ceiling analytically results in similar estimates as the split half estimator and approaches the true noise ceiling under a variety of simulated noise scenarios. Finally, the methods are tested on real fMRI data acquired at 7 Tesla.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1553-7358</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1553-734X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1553-7358</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006397</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30849071</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Brain ; Brain - physiology ; Brain mapping ; Cognitive ability ; Computation ; Computational neuroscience ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Computer Simulation ; Data acquisition ; Diagnostic imaging ; Exact solutions ; Functional magnetic resonance imaging ; Humans ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Mathematical analysis ; Medical imaging ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Methods ; Model accuracy ; Monte Carlo Method ; Monte Carlo methods ; Monte Carlo simulation ; Neuroimaging ; Neurology ; Neurosciences ; NMR ; Noise ; Noise measurement ; Nuclear magnetic resonance ; Physical Sciences ; Physiology ; Regularization ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Supervision ; Time series</subject><ispartof>PLoS computational biology, 2019-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e1006397</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2019 Lage-Castellanos et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2019 Lage-Castellanos et al 2019 Lage-Castellanos et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c699t-6db188b24e5936130fc425bca4d01cfc771da2ababa7f1810eeece170b406ec53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c699t-6db188b24e5936130fc425bca4d01cfc771da2ababa7f1810eeece170b406ec53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2596-1540 ; 0000-0001-5008-2460</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6426260/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6426260/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30849071$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Diedrichsen, Jörn</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valente, Giancarlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Formisano, Elia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Martino, Federico</creatorcontrib><title>Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses</title><title>PLoS computational biology</title><addtitle>PLoS Comput Biol</addtitle><description>Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the computations underlying the brain function that is being considered. However, the prediction accuracy is bounded by the proportion of the variance of the brain response which is related to the measurement noise and not to the stimuli (or cognitive functions). This bound to the performance of a computational model has been referred to as the noise ceiling. In previous fMRI applications two methods have been proposed to estimate the noise ceiling based on either a split-half procedure or Monte Carlo simulations. These methods make different assumptions over the nature of the effects underlying the data, and, importantly, their relation has not been clarified yet. Here, we derive an analytical form for the noise ceiling that does not require computationally expensive simulations or a splitting procedure that reduce the amount of data. The validity of this analytical definition is proved in simulations, we show that the analytical solution results in the same estimate of the noise ceiling as the Monte Carlo method. Considering different simulated noise structure, we evaluate different estimators of the variance of the responses and their impact on the estimation of the noise ceiling. We furthermore evaluate the interplay between regularization (often used to estimate model fits to the data when the number of computational features in the model is large) and model complexity on the performance with respect to the noise ceiling. Our results indicate that when considering the variance of the responses across runs, computing the noise ceiling analytically results in similar estimates as the split half estimator and approaches the true noise ceiling under a variety of simulated noise scenarios. Finally, the methods are tested on real fMRI data acquired at 7 Tesla.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Brain - physiology</subject><subject>Brain mapping</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Computation</subject><subject>Computational neuroscience</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Data acquisition</subject><subject>Diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Exact solutions</subject><subject>Functional magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Monte Carlo Method</subject><subject>Monte Carlo methods</subject><subject>Monte Carlo simulation</subject><subject>Neuroimaging</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>NMR</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Noise measurement</subject><subject>Nuclear magnetic resonance</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Physiology</subject><subject>Regularization</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Supervision</subject><subject>Time series</subject><issn>1553-7358</issn><issn>1553-734X</issn><issn>1553-7358</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkktv1DAQxyMEog_4BggicSmHXez4EfuCVFU8VmpBKiCOluOMd72K49ROUPn2eNm06iIuaA62Zn7zn4emKF5gtMSkxm-3YYq97paDadwSI8SJrB8Vx5gxsqgJE48f_I-Kk5S2COWv5E-LI4IElajGx8WPKxg3oU2lDbE0wQ_T6Pp1OW6g9PrW-cmXA8Qc9Lo3UAY7Q3p0IVcvfWihSzu_vbpelRHSEPoE6VnxxOouwfP5PS2-f3j_7eLT4vLLx9XF-eXCcCnHBW8bLERTUWCScEyQNbRijdG0RdhYU9e41ZVustUWC4wAwACuUUMRB8PIafFqrzt0Ial5J0lVFUOckopXmVjtiTborRqi8zr-UkE79ccR4lrpODrTgTLAhOHCEmks1boRNZeUYMYFzj5Ns9a7udrUeGgN9GPU3YHoYaR3G7UOPxWnuRWOssDZLBDDzQRpVN4lA12newhT7hsLyShnSGb09V_ov6db7qm1zgO43oZc12RrwTsTerAu-89ZXp3kpKpzwpuDhMyMcDuu9ZSSWn29_g_28yFL96yJIaUI9n4rGKndwd61r3YHq-aDzWkvH270PunuQslvY0voWA</recordid><startdate>20190301</startdate><enddate>20190301</enddate><creator>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin</creator><creator>Valente, Giancarlo</creator><creator>Formisano, Elia</creator><creator>De Martino, Federico</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AL</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0N</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2596-1540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5008-2460</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190301</creationdate><title>Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses</title><author>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin ; Valente, Giancarlo ; Formisano, Elia ; De Martino, Federico</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c699t-6db188b24e5936130fc425bca4d01cfc771da2ababa7f1810eeece170b406ec53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Brain - physiology</topic><topic>Brain mapping</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Computation</topic><topic>Computational neuroscience</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Data acquisition</topic><topic>Diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Exact solutions</topic><topic>Functional magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Monte Carlo Method</topic><topic>Monte Carlo methods</topic><topic>Monte Carlo simulation</topic><topic>Neuroimaging</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>NMR</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Noise measurement</topic><topic>Nuclear magnetic resonance</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Physiology</topic><topic>Regularization</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Supervision</topic><topic>Time series</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valente, Giancarlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Formisano, Elia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Martino, Federico</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Computing Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Computing Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PLoS computational biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lage-Castellanos, Agustin</au><au>Valente, Giancarlo</au><au>Formisano, Elia</au><au>De Martino, Federico</au><au>Diedrichsen, Jörn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses</atitle><jtitle>PLoS computational biology</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS Comput Biol</addtitle><date>2019-03-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e1006397</spage><pages>e1006397-</pages><issn>1553-7358</issn><issn>1553-734X</issn><eissn>1553-7358</eissn><abstract>Computational neuroimaging methods aim to predict brain responses (measured e.g. with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]) on the basis of stimulus features obtained through computational models. The accuracy of such prediction is used as an indicator of how well the model describes the computations underlying the brain function that is being considered. However, the prediction accuracy is bounded by the proportion of the variance of the brain response which is related to the measurement noise and not to the stimuli (or cognitive functions). This bound to the performance of a computational model has been referred to as the noise ceiling. In previous fMRI applications two methods have been proposed to estimate the noise ceiling based on either a split-half procedure or Monte Carlo simulations. These methods make different assumptions over the nature of the effects underlying the data, and, importantly, their relation has not been clarified yet. Here, we derive an analytical form for the noise ceiling that does not require computationally expensive simulations or a splitting procedure that reduce the amount of data. The validity of this analytical definition is proved in simulations, we show that the analytical solution results in the same estimate of the noise ceiling as the Monte Carlo method. Considering different simulated noise structure, we evaluate different estimators of the variance of the responses and their impact on the estimation of the noise ceiling. We furthermore evaluate the interplay between regularization (often used to estimate model fits to the data when the number of computational features in the model is large) and model complexity on the performance with respect to the noise ceiling. Our results indicate that when considering the variance of the responses across runs, computing the noise ceiling analytically results in similar estimates as the split half estimator and approaches the true noise ceiling under a variety of simulated noise scenarios. Finally, the methods are tested on real fMRI data acquired at 7 Tesla.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>30849071</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006397</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2596-1540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5008-2460</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1553-7358 |
ispartof | PLoS computational biology, 2019-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e1006397 |
issn | 1553-7358 1553-734X 1553-7358 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2250643262 |
source | MEDLINE; NCBI_PubMed Central(免费); PLoS_OA刊; Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Accuracy Biology and Life Sciences Brain Brain - physiology Brain mapping Cognitive ability Computation Computational neuroscience Computer and Information Sciences Computer Simulation Data acquisition Diagnostic imaging Exact solutions Functional magnetic resonance imaging Humans Magnetic resonance imaging Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Mathematical analysis Medical imaging Medicine and Health Sciences Methods Model accuracy Monte Carlo Method Monte Carlo methods Monte Carlo simulation Neuroimaging Neurology Neurosciences NMR Noise Noise measurement Nuclear magnetic resonance Physical Sciences Physiology Regularization Reproducibility of Results Research and Analysis Methods Supervision Time series |
title | Methods for computing the maximum performance of computational models of fMRI responses |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T16%3A54%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Methods%20for%20computing%20the%20maximum%20performance%20of%20computational%20models%20of%20fMRI%20responses&rft.jtitle=PLoS%20computational%20biology&rft.au=Lage-Castellanos,%20Agustin&rft.date=2019-03-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e1006397&rft.pages=e1006397-&rft.issn=1553-7358&rft.eissn=1553-7358&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006397&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA581096327%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2250643262&rft_id=info:pmid/30849071&rft_galeid=A581096327&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_ce58c68f39cf4aab87694315681f39a4&rfr_iscdi=true |