Regularized Hypothesis Testing in Random Fields with Applications to Neuroimaging

Abstract The task of determining for which elements of a random field (e.g., pixels in an image) a certain null hypothesis may be rejected is a relevant problem in several scientific areas. In the current contribution, we introduce a new method for performing this task, the regularized hypothesis te...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Revista mexicana de ingeniería biomédica 2020-08, Vol.41 (2), p.22-39
Hauptverfasser: Dalmau-Cedeño, Oscar S., Alvarado-Carrillo, Dora E., Marroquín, José Luis
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; por
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract The task of determining for which elements of a random field (e.g., pixels in an image) a certain null hypothesis may be rejected is a relevant problem in several scientific areas. In the current contribution, we introduce a new method for performing this task, the regularized hypothesis testing (RHT) method, focusing on its use in neuroimaging research. RHT is based on the formulation of the hypothesis testing task as a Bayesian estimation problem, with the previous application of a Markovian random field. The latter allows for the incorporation of local spatial information and considers different noise models, including spatially correlated noise. In tests on synthetic data showing regular activation levels on uncorrelated noise fields, RHT furnished a true positive rate (TPR) of 0.97, overcoming the state-of-the-art morphology-based hypothesis testing (MBHT) method and the traditional family-wise error rate (FWER) method, which afforded 0.93 and 0.58, respectively. For fields with highly correlated noise, the TPR provided by RHT was 0.65, and by MBHT and FWER was 0.35 and 0.29, respectively. For tests utilizing real functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data, RHT managed to locate the activation regions when 60% of the original signal were removed, while MBHT located only one region and FWER located none.
ISSN:2395-9126
DOI:10.17488/rmib.41.2.2