Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 634

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prioritizing spatial accuracy in high-resolution fMRI data using multivariate feature weight mapping

Open access
Stelzer, Johannes, Buschmann, Tilo, Lohmann, Gabriele, Margulies, Daniel S., Trampel, Robert, Turner, Robert·2014·Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract

Although ultra-high-field fMRI at field strengths of 7T or above provides substantial gains in BOLD contrast-to-noise ratio, when very high-resolution fMRI is required such gains are inevitably reduced. The improvement in sensitivity provided by multivariate analysis techniques, as compared with univariate methods, then becomes especially welcome. Information mapping approaches are commonly used, such as the searchlight technique, which take into account the spatially distributed patterns of activation in order to predict stimulus conditions. However, the popular searchlight decoding technique, in particular, has been found to be prone to spatial inaccuracies. For instance, the spatial extent of informative areas is generally exaggerated, and their spatial configuration is distorted. We propose the combination of a non-parametric and permutation-based statistical framework with linear classifiers. We term this new combined method Feature Weight Mapping (FWM). The main goal of the proposed method is to map the specific contribution of each voxel to the classification decision while including a correction for the multiple comparisons problem. Next, we compare this new method to the searchlight approach using a simulation and ultra-high-field 7T experimental data. We found that the searchlight method led to spatial inaccuracies that are especially noticeable in high-resolution fMRI data. In contrast, FWM was more spatially precise, revealing both informative anatomical structures as well as the direction by which voxels contribute to the classification. By maximizing the spatial accuracy of ultra-high-field fMRI results, global multivariate methods provide a substantial improvement for characterizing structure-function relationships.

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 · 10.3389/fnins.2014.00066

Cites

4 of 4 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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 634

Metadata

Authors
Stelzer, J., Buschmann, T., Lohmann, G., Margulies, D. S., Trampel, R., & Turner, R.
Venue
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Published
2014-04-16
Volume
8
Pages
66-66
ISSN
1662-453X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1973753081
Cited by
634
References
4
FWCI
51.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Prioritizing spatial accuracy in high-resolution fMRI data using multivariate feature weight mapping. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fnins.2014.00066
The paper
Stelzer, J., Buschmann, T., Lohmann, G., Margulies, D. S., Trampel, R., & Turner, R. (2014). Prioritizing spatial accuracy in high-resolution fMRI data using multivariate feature weight mapping. Frontiers in Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00066

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.