{"title":"Do Transformers and CNNs Learn Different Concepts of Brain Age?","authors":"Nys Tjade Siegel, Dagmar Kainmueller, Fatma Deniz, Kerstin Ritter, Marc-Andre Schulz","doi":"10.1002/hbm.70243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>“Predicted brain age” refers to a biomarker of structural brain health derived from machine learning analysis of T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance (MR) images. A range of machine learning methods have been used to predict brain age, with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) currently yielding state-of-the-art accuracies. Recent advances in deep learning have introduced transformers, which are conceptually distinct from CNNs, and appear to set new benchmarks in various domains of computer vision. Given that transformers are not yet established in brain age prediction, we present three key contributions to this field: First, we examine whether transformers outperform CNNs in predicting brain age. Second, we identify that different deep learning model architectures potentially capture different (sub-)sets of brain aging effects, reflecting divergent “concepts of brain age”. Third, we analyze whether such differences manifest in practice. To investigate these questions, we adapted a Simple Vision Transformer (sViT) and a shifted window transformer (SwinT) to predict brain age, and compared both models with a ResNet50 on 46,381 T1-weighted structural MR images from the UK Biobank. We found that SwinT and ResNet performed on par, though SwinT is likely to surpass ResNet in prediction accuracy with additional training data. Furthermore, to assess whether sViT, SwinT, and ResNet capture different concepts of brain age, we systematically analyzed variations in their predictions and clinical utility for indicating deviations in neurological and psychiatric disorders. Reassuringly, we observed no substantial differences in the structure of brain age predictions across the model architectures. Our findings suggest that the choice of deep learning model architecture does not appear to have a confounding effect on brain age studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13019,"journal":{"name":"Human Brain Mapping","volume":"46 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70243","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Brain Mapping","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70243","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
“Predicted brain age” refers to a biomarker of structural brain health derived from machine learning analysis of T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance (MR) images. A range of machine learning methods have been used to predict brain age, with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) currently yielding state-of-the-art accuracies. Recent advances in deep learning have introduced transformers, which are conceptually distinct from CNNs, and appear to set new benchmarks in various domains of computer vision. Given that transformers are not yet established in brain age prediction, we present three key contributions to this field: First, we examine whether transformers outperform CNNs in predicting brain age. Second, we identify that different deep learning model architectures potentially capture different (sub-)sets of brain aging effects, reflecting divergent “concepts of brain age”. Third, we analyze whether such differences manifest in practice. To investigate these questions, we adapted a Simple Vision Transformer (sViT) and a shifted window transformer (SwinT) to predict brain age, and compared both models with a ResNet50 on 46,381 T1-weighted structural MR images from the UK Biobank. We found that SwinT and ResNet performed on par, though SwinT is likely to surpass ResNet in prediction accuracy with additional training data. Furthermore, to assess whether sViT, SwinT, and ResNet capture different concepts of brain age, we systematically analyzed variations in their predictions and clinical utility for indicating deviations in neurological and psychiatric disorders. Reassuringly, we observed no substantial differences in the structure of brain age predictions across the model architectures. Our findings suggest that the choice of deep learning model architecture does not appear to have a confounding effect on brain age studies.
期刊介绍:
Human Brain Mapping publishes peer-reviewed basic, clinical, technical, and theoretical research in the interdisciplinary and rapidly expanding field of human brain mapping. The journal features research derived from non-invasive brain imaging modalities used to explore the spatial and temporal organization of the neural systems supporting human behavior. Imaging modalities of interest include positron emission tomography, event-related potentials, electro-and magnetoencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging, and single-photon emission tomography. Brain mapping research in both normal and clinical populations is encouraged.
Article formats include Research Articles, Review Articles, Clinical Case Studies, and Technique, as well as Technological Developments, Theoretical Articles, and Synthetic Reviews. Technical advances, such as novel brain imaging methods, analyses for detecting or localizing neural activity, synergistic uses of multiple imaging modalities, and strategies for the design of behavioral paradigms and neural-systems modeling are of particular interest. The journal endorses the propagation of methodological standards and encourages database development in the field of human brain mapping.