变形金刚和cnn学到了不同的脑龄概念吗?

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 NEUROIMAGING
Nys Tjade Siegel, Dagmar Kainmueller, Fatma Deniz, Kerstin Ritter, Marc-Andre Schulz
{"title":"变形金刚和cnn学到了不同的脑龄概念吗?","authors":"Nys Tjade Siegel,&nbsp;Dagmar Kainmueller,&nbsp;Fatma Deniz,&nbsp;Kerstin Ritter,&nbsp;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":"{\"title\":\"Do Transformers and CNNs Learn Different Concepts of Brain Age?\",\"authors\":\"Nys Tjade Siegel,&nbsp;Dagmar Kainmueller,&nbsp;Fatma Deniz,&nbsp;Kerstin Ritter,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

“预测脑年龄”是指从t1加权脑磁共振(MR)图像的机器学习分析中得出的大脑结构健康的生物标志物。一系列机器学习方法已被用于预测大脑年龄,卷积神经网络(cnn)目前具有最先进的精度。深度学习的最新进展引入了与cnn在概念上不同的变压器,并且似乎在计算机视觉的各个领域设定了新的基准。鉴于变压器尚未在脑年龄预测中建立起来,我们提出了该领域的三个关键贡献:首先,我们研究变压器在预测脑年龄方面是否优于cnn。其次,我们发现不同的深度学习模型架构可能捕获不同的(子)脑老化效应集,反映了不同的“脑年龄概念”。第三,分析这些差异是否在实践中表现出来。为了研究这些问题,我们采用了简单视觉变压器(sViT)和移位窗口变压器(SwinT)来预测大脑年龄,并将这两种模型与来自UK Biobank的46,381张t1加权结构MR图像的ResNet50进行比较。我们发现,swt和ResNet的表现相当,尽管在使用额外的训练数据时,swt的预测精度可能会超过ResNet。此外,为了评估sViT、swt和ResNet是否捕获了不同的脑年龄概念,我们系统地分析了它们的预测差异和用于指示神经和精神疾病偏差的临床应用。令人放心的是,我们观察到在不同的模型结构中,大脑年龄预测的结构没有实质性的差异。我们的研究结果表明,深度学习模型架构的选择似乎不会对脑年龄研究产生混淆效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Do Transformers and CNNs Learn Different Concepts of Brain Age?

Do Transformers and CNNs Learn Different Concepts of Brain Age?

“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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Brain Mapping
Human Brain Mapping 医学-核医学
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
401
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信