1 / 64

Massively Univariate Inference for fMRI

Massively Univariate Inference for fMRI. Thomas Nichols, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Biostatistics University of Michigan http://www.sph.umich.edu/~nichols ISBI April 15, 2004. Introduction & Overview. Inference in fMRI Where’s the blob!? Overview

willa
Download Presentation

Massively Univariate Inference for fMRI

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Massively Univariate Inference for fMRI Thomas Nichols, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Biostatistics University of Michigan http://www.sph.umich.edu/~nichols ISBI April 15, 2004

  2. Introduction & Overview • Inference in fMRI • Where’s the blob!? • Overview I. Statistics Background II. Assessing Statistic Images III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  3. I. Statistics Background • Hypothesis Testing • Fixed vs Random Effects • Nonparametric/resampling inference I. Statistics Background

  4. u  Null Distribution of T t P-val Null Distribution of T Hypothesis Testing • Null Hypothesis H0 • Test statistic T • t observed realization of T •  level • Acceptable false positive rate • P( T>u | H0) =  • P-value • Assessment of t assuming H0 • P( T > t | H0 ) • Prob. of obtaining stat. as large or larger in a new experiment • P(Data|Null) not P(Null|Data) I. Statistics Background

  5. Random Effects Models • GLM has only one source of randomness • Residual error  • But people are another source of error • Everyone activates somewhat differently… I. Statistics Background

  6. Fixed vs. RandomEffects Sampling distnsof each subject’s effect Subj. 1 • Fixed Effects • Intra-subject variation suggests all these subjects different from zero • Random Effects • Inter-subject variation suggests population not very different from zero Subj. 2 Subj. 3 Subj. 4 Subj. 5 Subj. 6 Populationdistn of effect 0 I. Statistics Background

  7. Random Effects for fMRI • Summary Statistic Approach • Easy • Create contrast images for each subject • Analyze contrast images with one-sample t • Limited • Only allows one scan per subject • Assumes balanced designs and homogeneous meas. error. • Full Mixed Effects Analysis • Hard • Requires iterative fitting • REML to estimate inter- and intra subject variance • SPM2 & FSL implement this, very differently • Very flexible I. Statistics Background

  8. 5% Parametric Null Distribution 5% Nonparametric Null Distribution Nonparametric Inference • Parametric methods • Assume distribution ofstatistic under nullhypothesis • Needed to find P-values, u • Nonparametric methods • Use data to find distribution of statisticunder null hypothesis • Any statistic! I. Statistics Background

  9. Nonparametric Inference:Permutation Test • Assumptions • Null Hypothesis Exchangeability • Method • Compute statistic t • Resample data (without replacement), compute t* • {t*} permutation distribution of test statistic • P-value = #{ t* > t } / #{ t* } • Theory • Given data and H0, each t* has equal probability • Still can assume data randomly drawn from population I. Statistics Background

  10. Permutation TestToy Example • Data from V1 voxel in visual stim. experiment A: Active, flashing checkerboard B: Baseline, fixation 6 blocks, ABABAB Just consider block averages... • Null hypothesis Ho • No experimental effect, A & B labels arbitrary • Statistic • Mean difference I. Statistics Background

  11. Permutation TestToy Example • Under Ho • Consider all equivalent relabelings • Compute all possible statistic values • Find 95%ile of permutation distribution I. Statistics Background

  12. Permutation TestToy Example • Under Ho • Consider all equivalent relabelings • Compute all possible statistic values • Find 95%ile of permutation distribution -8 -4 0 4 8 I. Statistics Background

  13. Permutation TestStrengths • Requires only assumption of exchangeability • Under Ho, distribution unperturbed by permutation • Allows us to build permutation distribution • Subjects are exchangeable • Under Ho, each subject’s A/B labels can be flipped • fMRI scans not exchangeable under Ho • Due to temporal autocorrelation I. Statistics Background

  14. Permutation TestLimitations • Computational Intensity • Analysis repeated for each relabeling • Not so bad on modern hardware • No analysis discussed below took more than 3 hours • Implementation Generality • Each experimental design type needs unique code to generate permutations • Not so bad for population inference with t-tests I. Statistics Background

  15. Nonparametric Inference:The Bootstrap • Theoretical differences • Independence instead of exchangeability • Asymtotically valid • For each design, finite sample size properties should be evaluated • Practical differences • Resample residuals with replacement • Residuals, not data, resampled • (1) Estimate model parameterb or statistic t • (2) Create residuals • (3) Resample residuals e* • (4) Add model fit to e*, constitute Bootstrap dataset y* • (5) Estimate b* or t* using y* • (6) Repeat (3)-(5) to build Bootstrap distribution of b* or t* • Many important details • See books: Efron & Tibshirani (1993), Davison & Hinkley (1997) I. Statistics Background

  16. t > 0.5 t > 3.5 t > 5.5 I. Assessing Statistic Images Where’s the signal? High Threshold Med. Threshold Low Threshold Good SpecificityPoor Power(risk of false negatives) Poor Specificity(risk of false positives)Good Power • ...but why threshold?! II. Assessing Statistic Images

  17. Blue-sky inference:What we’d like • Don’t threshold, model! • Signal location? • Estimates and CI’s on (x,y,z) location • Signal intensity? • CI’s on % change • Spatial extent? • Estimates and CI’s on activation volume • Robust to choice of cluster definition • ...but this requires an explicit spatial model II. Assessing Statistic Images

  18. Blue-sky inference...a spatial model? • No routine spatial modeling methods exist • High-dimensional mixture modeling problem • Activations don’t look like Gaussian blobs • Need realistic shapes, sparse representation • One initial attempt: • Hartvig, N. and Jensen, J. (2000). HBM, 11(4):233-248. II. Assessing Statistic Images

  19. Blue-sky inference:What we get • Signal location • Local maximum (no inference) • Center-of-mass (no inference) • Sensitive to blob-defining-threshold • Signal intensity • Local maximum intensity (P-value, CI’s) • Spatial extent • Volume above blob-defining-threshold(P-value, no CI’s) • Sensitive to blob-defining-threshold II. Assessing Statistic Images

  20. Voxel-wise Tests • Retain voxels above -level threshold u • Gives best spatial specificity • The null hyp. at a single voxel can be rejected u space Significant Voxels No significant Voxels II. Assessing Statistic Images

  21. Cluster-wise tests • Two step-process • Define clusters by arbitrary threshold uclus • Retain clusters larger than -level threshold k uclus space Cluster not significant Cluster significant k k II. Assessing Statistic Images

  22. Inference on ImagesCluster-wise tests • Typically better sensitivity • Worse spatial specificity • The null hyp. of entire cluster is rejected • Only means that one or more of voxels in cluster active uclus space Cluster not significant Cluster significant k k II. Assessing Statistic Images

  23. Voxel-Cluster Inference • Joint Inference • Combine both voxel height T & cluster size C • Poline et al used bivariate probability • JCBFM (1994) 14:639-642. • P( maxxCluster T(x) > t , C > c ) • Only for Gaussian images, Gaussian ACF • Bullmore et al use “cluster mass” • IEEE-TMI (1999) 18(1):32-42. • Test statistic = xCluster (T(x)-uclus) dx • No RFT result, uses permutation test II. Assessing Statistic Images

  24. Voxel-Cluster Inference • Not a new “level” of inference • cf, Friston et al (1996), Detecting Activations in PET and fMRI: Levels of Inference and Power. NI 4:223-325 • Joint null is intersection of nulls • Joint null = {Voxel null}  {Cluster null} • If joint null rejected, only know one or other is false • Can’t point to any voxel as active • Joint voxel-cluster inference really just “Intensity-informed cluster-wise inference” II. Assessing Statistic Images

  25. t > 2.5 t > 4.5 t > 0.5 t > 1.5 t > 3.5 t > 5.5 t > 6.5 Multiple Comparisons Problem • Which of 100,000 voxels are sig.? • =0.05  5,000 false positive voxels • Which of (random number, say) 100 clusters significant? • =0.05  5 false positives clusters II. Assessing Statistic Images

  26. MCP Solutions:Measuring False Positives • Familywise Error Rate (FWER) • Familywise Error • Existence of one or more false positives • FWER is probability of familywise error • False Discovery Rate (FDR) • FDR = E(V/R) • R voxels declared active, V falsely so • Realized false discovery rate: V/R II. Assessing Statistic Images

  27. Signal Measuring False PositivesFWER vs FDR Noise Signal+Noise II. Assessing Statistic Images

  28. 11.3% 11.3% 12.5% 10.8% 11.5% 10.0% 10.7% 11.2% 10.2% 9.5% 6.7% 10.5% 12.2% 8.7% 10.4% 14.9% 9.3% 16.2% 13.8% 14.0% Control of Per Comparison Rate at 10% Percentage of Null Pixels that are False Positives Control of Familywise Error Rate at 10% FWE Occurrence of Familywise Error Control of False Discovery Rate at 10% Percentage of Activated Pixels that are False Positives II. Assessing Statistic Images

  29. MCP Solutions:Measuring False Positives • Familywise Error Rate (FWER) • Familywise Error • Existence of one or more false positives • FWER is probability of familywise error • False Discovery Rate (FDR) • FDR = E(V/R) • R voxels declared active, V falsely so • Realized false discovery rate: V/R II. Assessing Statistic Images

  30. III. Thresholding Statistic ImagesFWER MCP Solutions • Bonferroni • Maximum Distribution Methods • Random Field Theory • Permutation III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  31. FWE MCP Solutions: Bonferroni • For a statistic image T... • Tiith voxel of statistic image T • ...use  = 0/V • 0 FWER level (e.g. 0.05) • V number of voxels • u -level statistic threshold, P(Ti u) =  • By Bonferroni inequality... FWER = P(FWE) = P( i {Tiu} | H0)i P( Tiu| H0 ) = i = i0 /V = 0 III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  32. FWER MCP Solutions • Bonferroni • Maximum Distribution Methods • Random Field Theory • Permutation III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  33. FWER MCP Solutions: Controlling FWER w/ Max • FWER & distribution of maximum FWER = P(FWE) = P( i {Tiu} | Ho) = P( maxiTi u | Ho) • 100(1-)%ile of max distn controls FWER FWER = P( maxiTi u | Ho) =  • where u = F-1max (1-) . III. Thresholding Statistic Images u

  34. FWER MCP Solutions:Random Field Theory • Euler Characteristic u • Topological Measure • #blobs - #holes • At high thresholds,just counts blobs • FWER = P(Max voxel u | Ho) = P(One or more blobs | Ho) P(u  1 | Ho) E(u| Ho) Threshold Random Field No holes Never more than 1 blob III. Thresholding Statistic Images Suprathreshold Sets

  35. Only very upper tail approximates1-Fmax(u) RFT Details:Expected Euler Characteristic E(u) () ||1/2 (u 2 -1) exp(-u 2/2) / (2)2 • Search regionR3 • (volume • ||1/2roughness • Assumptions • Multivariate Normal • Stationary* • ACF twice differentiable at 0 • Stationary • Results valid w/out stationary • More accurate when stat. holds III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  36. FWHM Autocorrelation Function Random Field TheorySmoothness Parameterization • E(u) depends on ||1/2 •  roughness matrix: • Smoothness parameterized as Full Width at Half Maximum • FWHM of Gaussian kernel needed to smooth a whitenoise random field to roughness  III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  37. Random Field TheorySmoothness Parameterization • RESELS • Resolution Elements • 1 RESEL = FWHMx FWHMy FWHMz • RESEL Count R • R = () || • Volume of search region in units of smoothness • Eg: 10 voxels, 2.5 FWHM, 4 RESELS • Wrong RESEL interpretation • “Number of independent ‘things’ in the image” • See Nichols & Hayasaka, 2003, Stat. Meth. in Med. Res. . III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  38. Random Field Intuition • Corrected P-value for voxel value t Pc = P(max T > t) E(t) () ||1/2t2 exp(-t2/2) • Statistic value t increases • Pc decreases (but only for large t) • Search volume increases • Pc increases (more severe MCP) • Roughness increases (Smoothness decreases) • Pc increases (more severe MCP) III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  39. RFT Details:Super General Formula • General form for expected Euler characteristic • 2, F, & t fields • restricted search regions •D dimensions • E[u(W)] = SdRd(W)rd (u) Rd (W):d-dimensional Minkowski functional of W – function of dimension, spaceWand smoothness: R0(W) = (W) Euler characteristic of W R1(W) = resel diameter R2(W) = resel surface area R3(W) = resel volume rd (W):d-dimensional EC density of Z(x) – function of dimension and threshold, specific for RF type: E.g. Gaussian RF: r0(u) = 1- (u) r1(u) = (4 ln2)1/2 exp(-u2/2) / (2p) r2(u) = (4 ln2) exp(-u2/2) / (2p)3/2 r3(u) = (4 ln2)3/2 (u2 -1) exp(-u2/2) / (2p)2 r4(u) = (4 ln2)2 (u3 -3u) exp(-u2/2) / (2p)5/2  III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  40. Expected Cluster Size E(S) = E(N)/E(L) S cluster size N suprathreshold volume({T > uclus}) L number of clusters E(N) = () P( T > uclus ) E(L)  E(u) Assuming no holes 5mm FWHM 10mm FWHM 15mm FWHM Random Field TheoryCluster Size Tests III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  41. Random Field TheoryCluster Size Distribution • Gaussian Random Fields (Nosko, 1969) • D: Dimension of RF • t Random Fields (Cao, 1999) • B: Beta distn • U’s: 2’s • c chosen s.t.E(S) = E(N) / E(L) III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  42. Random Field TheoryCluster Size Corrected P-Values • Previous results give uncorrected P-value • Corrected P-value • Bonferroni • Correct for expected number of clusters • Corrected Pc = E(L) Puncorr • Poisson Clumping Heuristic (Adler, 1980) • Corrected Pc = 1 - exp( -E(L) Puncorr ) III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  43. Lattice ImageData  Continuous Random Field Random Field Theory Limitations • Sufficient smoothness • FWHM smoothness 3-4 times voxel size • More like ~10 times for low-df data • Smoothness estimation • Estimate is biased when images not sufficiently smooth • Multivariate normality • Virtually impossible to check • Several layers of approximations III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  44. Active ... ... yes Baseline ... ... D UBKDA N XXXXX no Real Data • fMRI Study of Working Memory • 12 subjects, block design Marshuetz et al (2000) • Item Recognition • Active:View five letters, 2s pause, view probe letter, respond • Baseline: View XXXXX, 2s pause, view Y or N, respond • Second Level RFX • Difference image, A-B constructedfor each subject • One sample t test III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  45. Real Data:RFT Result • Threshold • S = 110,776 • 2  2  2 voxels5.1  5.8  6.9 mmFWHM • u = 9.870 • Result • 5 voxels above the threshold • 0.0063 minimumFWE-correctedp-value -log10 p-value III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  46. FWER-controlling MCP Solutions • Bonferroni • Maximum Distribution Methods • Random Field Theory • Permutation III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  47. 5% Parametric Null Max Distribution 5% Nonparametric Null Max Distribution Controlling FWER: Permutation Test • Parametric methods • Assume distribution ofmax statistic under nullhypothesis • Nonparametric methods • Use data to find distribution of max statisticunder null hypothesis • Any max statistic! III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  48. Permutation TestOther Statistics • Nonparametric allows arbitrary statistics • Standard ones are usually best, but... • Consider smoothed variance t statistic • To regularize low-df variance estimate III. Thresholding Statistic Images skip

  49. mean difference Permutation TestSmoothed Variance t • Nonparametric allows arbitrary statistics • Standard ones are usually best, but... • Consider smoothed variance t statistic t-statistic variance III. Thresholding Statistic Images

  50. Permutation TestSmoothed Variance t • Nonparametric allows arbitrary statistics • Standard ones are usually best, but... • Consider smoothed variance t statistic SmoothedVariancet-statistic mean difference smoothedvariance III. Thresholding Statistic Images

More Related