↓ Skip to main content

Deep learning for neuroimaging: a validation study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
102 X users
weibo
1 weibo user
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
457 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
825 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Deep learning for neuroimaging: a validation study
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00229
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergey M. Plis, Devon R. Hjelm, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Elena A. Allen, Henry J. Bockholt, Jeffrey D. Long, Hans J. Johnson, Jane S. Paulsen, Jessica A. Turner, Vince D. Calhoun

Abstract

Deep learning methods have recently made notable advances in the tasks of classification and representation learning. These tasks are important for brain imaging and neuroscience discovery, making the methods attractive for porting to a neuroimager's toolbox. Success of these methods is, in part, explained by the flexibility of deep learning models. However, this flexibility makes the process of porting to new areas a difficult parameter optimization problem. In this work we demonstrate our results (and feasible parameter ranges) in application of deep learning methods to structural and functional brain imaging data. These methods include deep belief networks and their building block the restricted Boltzmann machine. We also describe a novel constraint-based approach to visualizing high dimensional data. We use it to analyze the effect of parameter choices on data transformations. Our results show that deep learning methods are able to learn physiologically important representations and detect latent relations in neuroimaging data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 102 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 825 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 1%
Germany 6 <1%
France 4 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Other 7 <1%
Unknown 782 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 205 25%
Student > Master 132 16%
Researcher 131 16%
Student > Bachelor 47 6%
Other 37 4%
Other 125 15%
Unknown 148 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 204 25%
Engineering 118 14%
Neuroscience 103 12%
Psychology 58 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 5%
Other 102 12%
Unknown 201 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2019.
All research outputs
#645,359
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#269
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,128
of 246,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 246,916 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.