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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of thresholding on correlation-based image similarity metrics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2015.00418 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vanessa V. Sochat, Krzysztof J. Gorgolewski, Oluwasanmi Koyejo, Joke Durnez, Russell A. Poldrack |
| Abstract |
The computation of image similarity is important for a wide range of analyses in neuroimaging, from decoding to meta-analysis. In many cases the images being compared have empty voxels, but the effects of such empty voxels on image similarity metrics are poorly understood. We present a detailed investigation of the influence of different degrees of image thresholding on the outcome of pairwise image comparison. Given a pair of brain maps for which one of the maps is thresholded, we show that an analysis using the intersection of non-zero voxels across images at a threshold of Z = ±1.0 maximizes accuracy for retrieval of a list of maps of the same contrast, and thresholding up to Z = ±2.0 can increase accuracy as compared to comparison using unthresholded maps. Finally, maps can be thresholded up to to Z = ±3.0 (corresponding to 25% of voxels non-empty within a standard brain mask) and still maintain a lower bound of 90% accuracy. Our results suggest that a small degree of thresholding may improve the accuracy of image similarity computations, and that robust meta-analytic image similarity comparisons can be obtained using thresholded images. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 36% |
| Researcher | 3 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 3 | 27% |
| Psychology | 2 | 18% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 May 2017.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,668
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,510
of 295,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#104
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 295,434 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.