Cited by 271Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep neural networks and kernel regression achieve comparable accuracies for functional connectivity prediction of behavior and demographics

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

There is significant interest in the development and application of deep neural networks (DNNs) to neuroimaging data. A growing literature suggests that DNNs outperform their classical counterparts in a variety of neuroimaging applications, yet there are few direct comparisons of relative utility. Here, we compared the performance of three DNN architectures and a classical machine learning algorithm (kernel regression) in predicting individual phenotypes from whole-brain resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) patterns. One of the DNNs was a generic fully-connected feedforward neural network, while the other two DNNs were recently published approaches specifically designed to exploit the structure of connectome data. By using a combined sample of almost 10,000 participants from the Human Connectome Project (HCP) and UK Biobank, we showed that the three DNNs and kernel regression achieved similar performance across a wide range of behavioral and demographic measures. Furthermore, the generic feedforward neural network exhibited similar performance to the two state-of-the-art connectome-specific DNNs. When predicting fluid intelligence in the UK Biobank, performance of all algorithms dramatically improved when sample size increased from 100 to 1000 subjects. Improvement was smaller, but still significant, when sample size increased from 1000 to 5000 subjects. Importantly, kernel regression was competitive across all sample sizes. Overall, our study suggests that kernel regression is as effective as DNNs for RSFC-based behavioral prediction, while incurring significantly lower computational costs. Therefore, kernel regression might serve as a useful baseline algorithm for future studies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116276

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 124 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Maas, 2013, Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic models, vol. 28, 6

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
He, T., Kong, R., Holmes, A. J., Nguyen, M., Sabuncu, M. R., Eickhoff, S. B., Bzdok, D., Feng, J., & Yeo, B. T. T.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique (FR)
Corresponding author
Yeo, B.T. Thomas
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
206
Pages
116276
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2979650665
Cited by
271
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 26
FWCI
17.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Medical Research Council (CBRG/0088/2015)
  • National University of Singapore (R185000271720, DPRT/944/09/14)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Ministry of Education - Singapore (MOE2014-T2-2-016)
  • Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital (1U54MH091657, 25163)
  • National Research Foundation Singapore
  • NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research
  • McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
deep neural network, kernel regression, resting-state functional connectivity, feedforward neural networks, behavior prediction, fluid intelligence, demographic prediction, sample size effects, computational cost, Human Connectome Project, UK Biobank
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Brain, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Intelligence, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Psychomotor Performance, Sex Factors, Neural Networks, Computer, Biological Specimen Banks, Young Adult, Connectome, Datasets as Topic

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