The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Faster permutation inference in brain imaging
Open accessAbstract
Permutation tests are increasingly being used as a reliable method for inference in neuroimaging analysis. However, they are computationally intensive. For small, non-imaging datasets, recomputing a model thousands of times is seldom a problem, but for large, complex models this can be prohibitively slow, even with the availability of inexpensive computing power. Here we exploit properties of statistics used with the general linear model (GLM) and their distributions to obtain accelerations irrespective of generic software or hardware improvements. We compare the following approaches: (i) performing a small number of permutations; (ii) estimating the p-value as a parameter of a negative binomial distribution; (iii) fitting a generalised Pareto distribution to the tail of the permutation distribution; (iv) computing p-values based on the expected moments of the permutation distribution, approximated from a gamma distribution; (v) direct fitting of a gamma distribution to the empirical permutation distribution; and (vi) permuting a reduced number of voxels, with completion of the remainder using low rank matrix theory. Using synthetic data we assessed the different methods in terms of their error rates, power, agreement with a reference result, and the risk of taking a different decision regarding the rejection of the null hypotheses (known as the resampling risk). We also conducted a re-analysis of a voxel-based morphometry study as a real-data example. All methods yielded exact error rates. Likewise, power was similar across methods. Resampling risk was higher for methods (i), (iii) and (v). For comparable resampling risks, the method in which no permutations are done (iv) was the absolute fastest. All methods produced visually similar maps for the real data, with stronger effects being detected in the family-wise error rate corrected maps by (iii) and (v), and generally similar to the results seen in the reference set. Overall, for uncorrected p-values, method (iv) was found the best as long as symmetric errors can be assumed. In all other settings, including for familywise error corrected p-values, we recommend the tail approximation (iii). The methods considered are freely available in the tool PALM - Permutation Analysis of Linear Models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL
Smith, S. M., Jenkinson, M., Woolrich, M. W., Beckmann, C. F., Behrens, T. E. J., Johansen-Berg, H., Bannister, P. R., De Luca, M., Drobnjak, I., Flitney, D. E., et al. (2004) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051 · Cited by 13,630
Self-citationSMITH, S., & NICHOLS, T. (2009) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.061 · Cited by 5,250
Self-citationA Voxel-Based Morphometric Study of Ageing in 465 Normal Adult Human Brains
Good, C. D., Johnsrude, I. S., Ashburner, J., Henson, R. N. A., Friston, K. J., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (2001) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0786 · Cited by 4,561
Permutation inference for the general linear model
Winkler, A. M., Ridgway, G. R., Webster, M. A., Smith, S. M., & Nichols, T. E. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.01.060 · Cited by 3,563
Self-citationAsymptotic Theory of Certain "Goodness of Fit" Criteria Based on Stochastic Processes
Anderson, T. W., & Darling, D. A. (1952) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729437 · Cited by 3,542
The chips are down for Moore’s law
Waldrop, M. M. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/530144a · Cited by 2,397
Distributional assumptions in voxel-based morphometry
Salmond, C. H., Ashburner, J., Vargha-Khadem, F., Connelly, A., Gadian, D. G., & Friston, K. J. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1153 · Cited by 256
MARDIA, K. V. (1971) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/58.1.105 · Cited by 223
Cited by
Chen, X., Lu, B., & Yan, C. (2018) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.23843 · Cited by 340
Li, J., Duan, X., Cui, Q., Chen, H., & Liao, W. (2019) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291718001502 · Cited by 208
Serotonin regulation of behavior via large-scale neuromodulation of serotonin receptor networks
Salvan, P., Fonseca, M., Winkler, A. M., Beauchamp, A., Lerch, J. P., & Johansen-Berg, H. (2023) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-022-01213-3 · Cited by 101
Self-citationDeficits in neurite density underlie white matter structure abnormalities in first-episode psychosis
Rae, C. L., Davies, G., Garfinkel, S. N., Gabel, M. C., Dowell, N. G., Cercignani, M., Seth, A. K., Greenwood, K. E., Medford, N., & Critchley, H. D. (2017) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2017.02.008 · Cited by 65
Bouts, M. J. R. J., Möller, C., Hafkemeijer, A., van Swieten, J. C., Dopper, E., van der Flier, W. M., Vrenken, H., Wink, A. M., Pijnenburg, Y. A. L., Scheltens, P., et al. (2018) · Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease · doi:10.3233/jad-170893 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Winkler, A. M., Ridgway, G. R., Douaud, G., Nichols, T. E., & Smith, S. M.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-11
- Volume
- 141
- Pages
- 502-516
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2418410189
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 16.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Faster permutation inference in brain imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.05.068
- The paper
- Winkler, A. M., Ridgway, G. R., Douaud, G., Nichols, T. E., & Smith, S. M. (2016). Faster permutation inference in brain imaging. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.05.068
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.