Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Deep behavioral phenotyping in functional MRI for cognitive mapping of the human brain

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad

Check these out next

1 of 70 Ad

Deep behavioral phenotyping in functional MRI for cognitive mapping of the human brain

Download to read offline

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) provides means to characterize brain activations in response to behavior. However, cognitive neuroscience has been limited to group-level effects referring to the performance of specific tasks. To obtain the functional profile of elementary cognitive mechanisms, the combination of brain responses to many tasks is required, by pooling data or results from different single-task studies. Meta-analyses allow the accumulation of knowledge across studies. Yet, they are typically impacted not only by inter-subject and inter-site variability but also loss of information from sparse peak-coordinate representations. In this talk, I will address a battery of studies, which combine deep phenotyping and multitask-fMRI approaches to extensively investigate the functional signatures of the different components that characterize the human behavior. First, I will describe a set of experiments, based on temporally controlled task designs, reported in [1], [2] and [3], in which we leverage a collection of source task-fMRI data from the Individual Brain Charting (IBC) dataset. The main goal herein is to investigate the feasibility of performing individual functional brain atlasing, free from inter-subject and inter-site variability, as an effort to establish an univocal relationship between functional segregation of brain regions and elementary mental functions. Results show that individual topographies---common to all tasks---are consistently mapped within and, to a lesser extent, across participants. Besides, prediction scores associated with the reconstruction of contrasts of one task from the remaining ones reveal the quantitative contribution of each task to these common representations. Yet, scores decreased when subjects were permuted between train and test, confirming that topographies are driven by subject-specific variability. In addition, we demonstrate how cognitive mapping can benefit from contrasts accumulation, by analyzing the functional fingerprints of a set of individualized regions-of-interest from the language network. Second, I will describe our ongoing work on the quality-assessment and validation of a subset of tasks from IBC dataset based on naturalistic stimuli using a Fast Shared Response Model encoding experiment [4]. I will finish this presentation with some insights about the application of the aforementioned functional-atlasing techniques to probe region-specific topographies linked to a particular neurocognitive mechanism of interest.

[1] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2021) DOI: 10.1002/hbm.25189
[2] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2018) DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2018.105
[3] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2020) DOI: 10.1038/s41597-020-00670-4
[4] Richard, H. et al. (2019) DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1909.12537

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) provides means to characterize brain activations in response to behavior. However, cognitive neuroscience has been limited to group-level effects referring to the performance of specific tasks. To obtain the functional profile of elementary cognitive mechanisms, the combination of brain responses to many tasks is required, by pooling data or results from different single-task studies. Meta-analyses allow the accumulation of knowledge across studies. Yet, they are typically impacted not only by inter-subject and inter-site variability but also loss of information from sparse peak-coordinate representations. In this talk, I will address a battery of studies, which combine deep phenotyping and multitask-fMRI approaches to extensively investigate the functional signatures of the different components that characterize the human behavior. First, I will describe a set of experiments, based on temporally controlled task designs, reported in [1], [2] and [3], in which we leverage a collection of source task-fMRI data from the Individual Brain Charting (IBC) dataset. The main goal herein is to investigate the feasibility of performing individual functional brain atlasing, free from inter-subject and inter-site variability, as an effort to establish an univocal relationship between functional segregation of brain regions and elementary mental functions. Results show that individual topographies---common to all tasks---are consistently mapped within and, to a lesser extent, across participants. Besides, prediction scores associated with the reconstruction of contrasts of one task from the remaining ones reveal the quantitative contribution of each task to these common representations. Yet, scores decreased when subjects were permuted between train and test, confirming that topographies are driven by subject-specific variability. In addition, we demonstrate how cognitive mapping can benefit from contrasts accumulation, by analyzing the functional fingerprints of a set of individualized regions-of-interest from the language network. Second, I will describe our ongoing work on the quality-assessment and validation of a subset of tasks from IBC dataset based on naturalistic stimuli using a Fast Shared Response Model encoding experiment [4]. I will finish this presentation with some insights about the application of the aforementioned functional-atlasing techniques to probe region-specific topographies linked to a particular neurocognitive mechanism of interest.

[1] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2021) DOI: 10.1002/hbm.25189
[2] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2018) DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2018.105
[3] Pinho, A.L. et al. (2020) DOI: 10.1038/s41597-020-00670-4
[4] Richard, H. et al. (2019) DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1909.12537

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Deep behavioral phenotyping in functional MRI for cognitive mapping of the human brain (20)

More from Ana Luísa Pinho (12)

Advertisement

Recently uploaded (20)

Deep behavioral phenotyping in functional MRI for cognitive mapping of the human brain

  1. 1. @ALuisaPinho Seminar at SIMEXP, UdeM Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Deep behavioral phenotyping in functional MRI for cognitive mapping of the human brain Ana Luı́sa Pinho BrainsCAN Postdoctoral Fellow Western University, London Ontario, Canada This work was developed in the Parietal Team at NeuroSpin/Inria-Saclay, Paris, France. 14th of April, 2022
  2. 2. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Overview of the Individual Brain Charting (IBC) dataset Data-quality assessment of IBC Individual Functional Atlasing leveraging IBC First-Release Encoding analysis of naturalistic stimuli from IBC Third-Release using the Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) Future perspectives: mapping cognitive-specific mechanisms 2/35
  3. 3. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Overview of the IBC dataset
  4. 4. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (1/2) In cognitive neuroscience: Brain systems ⇐⇒ Mental functions 4/ 35
  5. 5. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (1/2) In cognitive neuroscience: Brain systems ⇐⇒ Mental functions Experiments typically shall: tackle one psychological domain 4/ 35
  6. 6. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (1/2) In cognitive neuroscience: Brain systems ⇐⇒ Mental functions Experiments typically shall: tackle one psychological domain be specific enough to accurately isolate brain processes 4/ 35
  7. 7. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (1/2) In cognitive neuroscience: Brain systems ⇐⇒ Mental functions Experiments typically shall: tackle one psychological domain be specific enough to accurately isolate brain processes ⇓ Very hard to achieve! Lack of generality.
  8. 8. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (1/2) In cognitive neuroscience: Brain systems ⇐⇒ Mental functions Task-fMRI experiments allow to: link brain systems to behavior map neural activity at mm-scale 4/ 35
  9. 9. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data 5/ 35
  10. 10. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data 5/ 35
  11. 11. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings ( ) cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data 5/ 35
  12. 12. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings ( ) cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data Large-scale repositories: OpenNeuro NeuroVault EBRAINS 5/ 35
  13. 13. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings ( ) cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data Large-scale repositories: OpenNeuro NeuroVault EBRAINS Individual analysis: Fedorenko, E. et al. (2011) Haxby, J. et al. (2011) Hanke, M. et al. (2014) 5/ 35
  14. 14. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings ( )( ) cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data Large-scale repositories: OpenNeuro NeuroVault EBRAINS Individual analysis: Fedorenko, E. et al. (2011) Haxby, J. et al. (2011) Hanke, M. et al. (2014) Large-scale datasets: HCP studyforrest CONNECT/Archi 5/ 35
  15. 15. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Background and motivations (2/2) Data-pooling analysis Meta-analysis: pooling data derivatives Mega-analysis: pooling raw data Requisites for cognitive mapping Minimize variability of Successful interpretation of spatial location combined results same processing no loss of info from sparse routines peak-coord. representation same experimental consistency of settings ( )( ) cognitive annotations low inter-subject variability sufficient multi-task data Large-scale repositories: OpenNeuro NeuroVault EBRAINS Individual analysis: Fedorenko, E. et al. (2011) Haxby, J. et al. (2011) Hanke, M. et al. (2014) Large-scale datasets: HCP studyforrest CONNECT/Archi The IBC dataset meets all together the requisites for cognitive mapping. 5/ 35
  16. 16. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) 6/ 35
  17. 17. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s 6/ 35
  18. 18. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s Task-wise dataset: Many tasks 6/ 35
  19. 19. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s Task-wise dataset: Many tasks Fixed cohort - 12 healthy adults 6/ 35
  20. 20. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s Task-wise dataset: Many tasks Fixed cohort - 12 healthy adults Fixed environment NeuroSpin platform, CEA-Saclay, France Siemens 3T Magnetom Prismafit 64-channel coil 6/ 35
  21. 21. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s Task-wise dataset: Many tasks Fixed cohort - 12 healthy adults Fixed environment Inclusion of other MRI modalities NeuroSpin platform, CEA-Saclay, France Siemens 3T Magnetom Prismafit 64-channel coil 6/ 35
  22. 22. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks The IBC dataset High spatial-resolution fMRI data (1.5mm) TR = 2s Task-wise dataset: Many tasks Fixed cohort - 12 healthy adults Fixed environment Inclusion of other MRI modalities Not a longitudinal study! NeuroSpin platform, CEA-Saclay, France Siemens 3T Magnetom Prismafit 64-channel coil 6/ 35
  23. 23. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analysis pipeline 7/ 35
  24. 24. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Data-quality assessment of the IBC First-Release
  25. 25. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Tasks of the First Release I ARCHI tasks Standard Spatial Social Emotional I HCP tasks Emotion Gambling Motor Language Relational Social Working Memory I RSVP Language 9/ 35
  26. 26. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Tasks of the First Release I ARCHI tasks Standard Spatial Social Emotional I HCP tasks Emotion Gambling Motor Language Relational Social Working Memory I RSVP Language I Sensory processing: Retinotopy Tonotopy Somatotopy I High-cognitive order: Calculation Language Social cognition Theory-of-mind 9/ 35
  27. 27. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Tasks of the First Release I ARCHI tasks Standard Spatial Social Emotional I HCP tasks Emotion Gambling Motor Language Relational Social Working Memory I RSVP Language I Sensory processing: Retinotopy Tonotopy Somatotopy I High-cognitive order: Calculation Language Social cognition Theory-of-mind All contrasts: 119 Elementary contrasts: 59 9/ 35
  28. 28. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks IBC reproduces ARCHI and HCP t a l e v s . m e n t a l a d d i t i o n m e n t a l m o t i o n v s . r a n d o m m o t i o n p u n i s h m e n t v s . r e w a r d l e f t f o o t v s . a n y m o t i o n l e f t h a n d v s . a n y m o t i o n r i g h t f o o t v s . a n y m o t i o n r i g h t h a n d v s . a n y m o t i o n t o n g u e v s . a n y m o t i o n f a c e i m a g e v s . s h a p e o u t l i n e r e l a t i o n a l p r o c e s s i n g v s . v i s u a l m a t c h i n g 2 - b a c k v s . 0 - b a c k b o d y i m a g e v s . a n y i m a g e f a c e i m a g e v s . a n y i m a g e p l a c e i m a g e v s . a n y i m a g e t o o l i m a g e v s . a n y i m a g e h o r i z o n t a l c h e c k e r b o a r d v s . v e r t i c a l c h e c k e r b o a r d m e n t a l s u b t r a c t i o n v s . s e n t e n c e r e a d s e n t e n c e v s . l i s t e n t o s e n t e n c e r e a d s e n t e n c e v s . c h e c k e r b o a r d l e f t h a n d v s . r i g h t h a n d s a c c a d e v s . f i x a t i o n g u e s s w h i c h h a n d v s . h a n d p a l m o r b a c k o b j e c t g r a s p i n g v s . m i m i c o r i e n t a t i o n m e n t a l m o t i o n v s . r a n d o m m o t i o n f a l s e - b e l i e f s t o r y v s . m e c h a n i s t i c s t o r y f a l s e - b e l i e f t a l e v s . m e c h a n i s t i c t a l e f a c e t r u s t y v s . f a c e g e n d e r e x p r e s s i o n i n t e n t i o n v s . e x p r e s s i o n g e n d e r tale vs. mental addition mental motion vs. random motion punishment vs. reward left foot vs. any motion left hand vs. any motion right foot vs. any motion right hand vs. any motion tongue vs. any motion face image vs. shape outline relational processing vs. visual matching 2-back vs. 0-back body image vs. any image face image vs. any image place image vs. any image tool image vs. any image horizontal checkerboard vs. vertical checkerboard mental subtraction vs. sentence read sentence vs. listen to sentence read sentence vs. checkerboard left hand vs. right hand saccade vs. fixation guess which hand vs. hand palm or back object grasping vs. mimic orientation mental motion vs. random motion false-belief story vs. mechanistic story false-belief tale vs. mechanistic tale face trusty vs. face gender expression intention vs. expression gender HCP contrasts ARCHI contrasts IBC contrasts 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 ARCHI batteries: Pinel, P. et al. (2007) HCP batteries: Barch, D. M. et al. (2013) n = 13 Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) 10/ 35
  29. 29. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Effect of subject and task on brain activity Per-voxel one-way ANOVA qFDR < 0.05 x=10 L R z=10 -28 -14 0 14 28 L R y=-50 Subject effect x=10 L R z=10 -37 -19 0 19 37 L R y=-50 Condition effect x=-6 L R z=3 -12 -5.9 0 5.9 12 L R y=45 Phase encoding effect Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2018) 11/ 35
  30. 30. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Effect of subject and task on brain activity Per-voxel one-way ANOVA qFDR < 0.05 x=10 L R z=10 -28 -14 0 14 28 L R y=-50 Subject effect x=10 L R z=10 -37 -19 0 19 37 L R y=-50 Condition effect x=-6 L R z=3 -12 -5.9 0 5.9 12 L R y=45 Phase encoding effect Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2018) IBC data is suitable for cognitive mapping and individual-brain modeling! 11/ 35
  31. 31. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Activation similarity fits task similarity Similarity between activation maps of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t i o n a l a r c h i s o c i a l a r c h i s p a t i a l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t i o n h c p g a m b l i n g h c p l a n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e l a t i o n a l h c p s o c i a l h c p w m r s v p l a n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Similarity between cognitive description of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t i o n a l a r c h i s o c i a l a r c h i s p a t i a l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t i o n h c p g a m b l i n g h c p l a n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e l a t i o n a l h c p s o c i a l h c p w m r s v p l a n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2018) 12/ 35
  32. 32. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Similarity between activation maps of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t io n a l a r c h i s o c ia l a r c h i s p a t ia l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t io n h c p g a m b li n g h c p la n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e la t io n a l h c p s o c ia l h c p w m r s v p la n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Similarity between cognitive description of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t io n a l a r c h i s o c ia l a r c h i s p a t ia l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t io n h c p g a m b li n g h c p la n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e la t io n a l h c p s o c ia l h c p w m r s v p la n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2018) Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2020) Second release: Mental Time Travel battery Gauthier, B., & van Wassenhove, V. (2016a,b) Preference battery Lebreton, M. et al. (2015) ToM + Pain Matrices battery Dodell-Feder, D. et al. (2010) Jacoby, N. et al. (2015) Richardson, H. et al. (2018) Visual Short-Term Memory + Enumeration tasks Knops, A. et al. (2014) Self-Reference Effect task Genon, S. et al. (2014) “Bang!” task Campbell, K. L. et al. (2015) 13/ 35
  33. 33. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Similarity between activation maps of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t io n a l a r c h i s o c ia l a r c h i s p a t ia l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t io n h c p g a m b li n g h c p la n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e la t io n a l h c p s o c ia l h c p w m r s v p la n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Similarity between cognitive description of elementary contrasts a r c h i e m o t io n a l a r c h i s o c ia l a r c h i s p a t ia l a r c h i s t a n d a r d h c p e m o t io n h c p g a m b li n g h c p la n g u a g e h c p m o t o r h c p r e la t io n a l h c p s o c ia l h c p w m r s v p la n g u a g e archi emotional archi social archi spatial archi standard hcp emotion hcp gambling hcp language hcp motor hcp relational hcp social hcp wm rsvp language 0 1 Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2018) Pinho, A.L. et al. SciData(2020) Second release: Mental Time Travel battery Gauthier, B., & van Wassenhove, V. (2016a,b) Preference battery Lebreton, M. et al. (2015) ToM + Pain Matrices battery Dodell-Feder, D. et al. (2010) Jacoby, N. et al. (2015) Richardson, H. et al. (2018) Visual Short-Term Memory + Enumeration tasks Knops, A. et al. (2014) Self-Reference Effect task Genon, S. et al. (2014) “Bang!” task Campbell, K. L. et al. (2015) Spearman correlation First Release: 0.21 (p ≤ 10−17) Second Release: 0.21 (p ≤ 10−13) First+Second Releases: 0.23 (p ≤ 10−72) 13/ 35
  34. 34. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Individual Functional Atlasing
  35. 35. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Variability of Functional Signatures Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 Individual z-maps 15/ 35
  36. 36. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Variability of Functional Signatures Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 0.00 0.25 0.50 read sentence vs. listen to sentence read sentence vs. checkerboard left hand vs. right hand horizontal checkerboard vs. vertical checkerboard mental subtraction vs. sentence saccade vs. fixation guess which hand vs. hand palm or back object grasping vs. mimic orientation mental motion vs. random motion false-belief story vs. mechanistic story false-belief tale vs. mechanistic tale expression intention vs. expression gender face trusty vs. face gender face image vs. shape outline punishment vs. reward 0.00 0.25 0.50 tongue vs. any motion right foot vs. any motion left foot vs. any motion right hand vs. any motion left hand vs. any motion tale vs. mental addition relational processing vs. visual matching mental motion vs. random motion tool image vs. any image place image vs. any image face image vs. any image body image vs. any image 2-back vs. 0-back read pseudowords vs. consonant strings read words vs. consonant strings read words vs. read pseudowords read sentence vs. read jabberwocky read sentence vs. read words inter-subject correlation intra-subject correlation Intra- and inter- subject correlation of brain maps 15/ 35
  37. 37. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Study 1 Dictionary of cognitive components
  38. 38. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Dictionary of cognitive components Decomposition of 51 contrasts with dictionary learning Individual topographies of 20 components (n = 13) Each component gets the name of the active condition from the contrast with the highest value in the dictionary. Multi-subject, sparse dictionary learning: min(Us )s=1...n,V∈C n X s=1 kXs − Us Vk2 + λkUs k1 , with Xs p×c , Us p×k and Vk×c Functional correspondence: dictionary of functional profiles (V) common to all subjects Sparsity: `1−norm penalty and Us ≥ 0 , ∀s ∈ [n] 17/ 35
  39. 39. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Dictionary of cognitive components Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 Components are consistently mapped across subjects. 17/ 35
  40. 40. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Dictionary of cognitive components Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 Components are consistently mapped across subjects. 17/ 35
  41. 41. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Dictionary of cognitive components Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 Intra-subject correlation Inter-subject correlation Correlations of the dictionary components on split-half data Variability of topographies linked to individual differences. 17/ 35
  42. 42. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Study 2 Reconstruction of functional contrasts
  43. 43. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Reconstruction of functional contrasts Leave-p-out CV (p=3 subjects) experiment to learn the shared representations from contrasts of eleven tasks. (n = 13) Predict all contrasts from the remaining task 19/ 35
  44. 44. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Reconstruction of functional contrasts Leave-p-out CV (p=3 subjects) experiment to learn the shared representations from contrasts of eleven tasks. (n = 13) Predict all contrasts from the remaining task Train a Ridge-regression model with individual contrast maps i of tasks −j to predict task j on individual contrast-maps s 6= i: b ws,λ,j = argminw∈Rc−1 X i6=s kXi j − Xi −j wk2 + λkwk2 Prediction output for one contrast of task j in subject s: b Xs j = Xs −j b ws,λ,j . Cross-validated R-squared for task j at location i: R2 i (j) = 1 − means∈[n] kb Xs i,j − Xs i,j k2 kXs i,j k2 19/ 35
  45. 45. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Reconstruction of functional contrasts Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) n = 13 max R2 Most of the brain regions are covered by the predicted functional signatures. 19/ 35
  46. 46. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Reconstruction of functional contrasts n = 13 Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) Ridge-Regression model for the scrambled case: b ws,λ,j = argminw∈Rc−1 X i,k 6= s kXi j −Xk −j wk2 +λkwk2 Cross-validated R-squared: R2 i (j) = 1 − means∈[n] kb Xs i,j − Xs0 i,j k2 kXs0 i,j k2 Permutations of subjects decrease the proportion of well-predicted voxels in all tasks, showing that topographies are driven by subject-specific variability. 19/ 35
  47. 47. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Study 3 Example: Functional mapping of the language network
  48. 48. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Ex: Functional mapping of the language network Goal: Cognitive profile of ROIs based on IBC language-related contrasts Select ROIs / Select IBC contrasts Individualize ROIs using dual-regression and the left-out contrasts R(s) = R pinv X(s) X(s) Voxelwise z-scores average for each ROI at every selected contrast Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) 21/ 35
  49. 49. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Ex: Functional mapping of the language network Linear SVC (upper triangle) Dummy Classifier (lower triangle) LOGOCV scheme Prediction within pairs of ROIs 13 groups = 13 participants Pinho, A.L. et al. Hum Brain Mapp(2021) 21/ 35
  50. 50. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Conclusions Functional atlasing using a large dataset in the task dimension Investigation of common functional profiles between tasks Common functional profiles Shared behavioral responses Mental functions 22/ 35
  51. 51. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Conclusions Functional atlasing using a large dataset in the task dimension Investigation of common functional profiles between tasks Common functional profiles Shared behavioral responses Mental functions Individual brain modeling using data with higher spatial resolution generalize across subjects elicit variability between subjects 22/ 35
  52. 52. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks FastSRM encoding analysis of naturalistic stimuli
  53. 53. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Naturalistic Tasks from the third release Clips task: 4 fMRI Sessions / 21 Runs Nishimoto, S. et al. (2011) Raiders task: 2 fMRI Sessions: 13 Runs Haxby, J. V. et al. (2011) 24/ 35
  54. 54. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ 25/ 35
  55. 55. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ Why FastSRM? 25/ 35
  56. 56. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ Why FastSRM? Standard GLM applied to naturalistic stimuli leads to high-dimensional controlled-design models. 25/ 35
  57. 57. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ Why FastSRM? Standard GLM applied to naturalistic stimuli leads to high-dimensional controlled-design models. Unsupervised data-driven approach where the design matrix and the spatial maps are learnt jointly is more wieldy. 25/ 35
  58. 58. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ Why FastSRM? Standard GLM applied to naturalistic stimuli leads to high-dimensional controlled-design models. Unsupervised data-driven approach where the design matrix and the spatial maps are learnt jointly is more wieldy. Shared Response Model that aggregates multi-subject fMRI data and accounts for different individual functional topographies. 25/ 35
  59. 59. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Analyzing naturalistic-stimuli fMRI data with FastSRM Shared Response Model by Chen et al. (2015) Fast Shared Response Model (FastSRM) by Richard et al. (2019): https://hugorichard.github.io/FastSRM/ Why FastSRM? Standard GLM applied to naturalistic stimuli leads to high-dimensional controlled-design models. Unsupervised data-driven approach where the design matrix and the spatial maps are learnt jointly is more wieldy. Shared Response Model that aggregates multi-subject fMRI data and accounts for different individual functional topographies. High-dimensional data (many voxels) require a decomposition method with scalability. 25/ 35
  60. 60. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Qualitative description of FastSRM Richard et al. (2019) 26/ 35
  61. 61. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Formal description of SRM For all subjects and time frames, SRM can be formally defined as follows: X = SW + E (1) X ∈ RG×nv → concatenation of G brain images with v vertices for n=12 subjects S ∈ RG×k → shared response: concatenation of the weights across time frames W ∈ Rk×nv → concatenation of the k spatial components with v vertices for the n subjects E → the additive noise 27/ 35
  62. 62. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Formal description of SRM For all subjects and time frames, SRM can be formally defined as follows: X = SW + E (1) To estimate W and S, consider the following two-step SRM minimization problem: ∀s ∈ {1, ..., n}, argmin{Ws : Ws W T s =Ik } n X j=1 kXj − SWjk2 = UsVs (2) argminS n X s=1 kXs − SWsk2 = 1 n n X s=1 XsWT s , (3) 27/ 35
  63. 63. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks FastSRM algorithm Reduce data: Dimensions of the input data are reduced using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on X, using c components, with c ≪ v, in order to estimate the reduced data b X, such that b X ∈ RG×nc. Apply SRM algorithm: b X is applied on the two-step algorithm using alternate minimization, in order to find both the shared response b S and the spatial components c W in the reduced space. Recover Spatial Components: The spatial components of each subject are recovered by orthonormal regression using the shared response in reduced space b S and the data X. UsDsVs = SVD(ST Xs) 28/ 35
  64. 64. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Co-Smoothing, Double K-Fold CV for FastSRM for each task 1: b X = PCA(X) 2: b W,b S = SRM(b X) 3: UDV (−R/2) −4s = SVD b SX (−R/2) −4s , where W (−R/2) −4s = UV (−R/2) −4s 4: S (−R/2) −4s = Pn z=1,z6∈[4s] X (−R/2) −4s W (−R/2)T −4s n−4 5: S (R/2) −4s = Pn z=1,z6∈[4s] X (R/2) −4s W (−R/2)T −4s n−4 6: UDV (−R/2) 4s = SVD S (−R/2) −4s X (−R/2) 4s , where W (−R/2) 4s = UV (−R/2) 4s 7: e X (R/2) 4s = S (R/2) −4s W (−R/2) 4s 8: ρ (s,r) e XX = X e X (r) s − µ e X X (r) s − µX qX e X (r) s − µ e X 2 X X (r) s − µX 2 , where µ e X and µX represent the means of e X (r) s and X (r) s , respectively. CV scheme applied for each task with K = 3 for 12 subjects and K = 2 for R runs Co-Smoothing described in Wu, A. et al.(2018) NeurIPS 29/ 35
  65. 65. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Correlation of original vs. reconstructed data from FastSRM q 6 0.05 30/ 35
  66. 66. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Group-level activation between Raiders and Clips q 6 0.05 Top 10 regions of Glasser atlas w/ areas displaying ≥ 5% of significant voxels in both hemispheres 1 Auditory Association Cortex 2 Temporo-Parieto-Occipital Junction 3 Posterior Cingulate Cortex 4 Superior Parietal Cortex 5 Inferior Parietal Cortex 6 Early Auditory Cortex 7 Dorsal Stream Visual Cortex 8 Lateral Temporal Cortex 9 MT+Complex and Neighboring Visual Areas 10 Primary Visual Cortex (V1) 31/ 35
  67. 67. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Conclusions IBC Third-Release reflect responses to behavior. FastSRM is a computational low-cost approach to analyze task-fMRI time-series. Useful to analyse high-dimensional paradigms, such as naturalistic stimuli 32/ 35
  68. 68. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Thanks! Bertrand Thirion The IBC volunteers! 33/ 35
  69. 69. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Concluding Remarks Deep Behavioral Phenotyping in functional neuroimaging to study cognitive-specific mechanisms Remove idiosyncrasies of single tasks from the study Map commonalities of different but similar tasks to assess consistency (ex: map across different sensory modalities) Isolate executive and perceptual mechanisms from the same high-order cognitive function Improve connectivity models 34/ 35
  70. 70. Summary Overview of IBC Data-quality assessment Individual Functional Atlasing FastSRM encoding experiment Acknowledgments and Remarks Thank you for your attention.

×