skip to main content
10.1145/2490257.2490261acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbciConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Improving the performance of active voxel selection in the analysis of fMRI data using genetic algorithms

Published:19 September 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recent research has shown that it is possible to classify cognitive states of human subjects based on fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) data. One of the obstacles in classifying fMRI data is the problem of high dimensionality. A single fMRI snapshot consists of thousands of voxels and since a single experiment contains many fMRI snapshots, the dimensionality of an fMRI data instance easily surpasses the order of tens of thousands. So, feature selection methods become a must from both classification and running time performance points of view. To this end several feature selection methods are studied, either general or specific to fMRI data. So far, one of the best such methods, which is specific to fMRI data, is called the "active" method [9]. In this work we combine genetic algorithms with the active method in order to improve the performance of feature selection. Specifically, we first reduce the feature dimension using the active method and search for informative features in that reduced space using genetic algorithms. We achieve better or similar levels of classification performance using a much smaller number of voxels than the active method offers.

References

  1. M. B. Aberg and J. Wessberg. An evolutionary approach to the identification of informative voxel clusters for brain state discrimination. Selected Topics in Signal Processing, IEEE Journal of, 2(6):919--928, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. O. Boehm, D. Hardoon, and L. Manevitz. Classifying cognitive states of brain activity via one-class neural networks with feature selection by genetic algorithms. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 2:125--134, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. D. Collins, P. Neelin, T. Peters, and A. Evans. Automatic 3d intersubject registration of mr volumetric data in standardized talairach space. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 18:192--205, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. C. Davatzikos, K. Ruparel, Y. Fan, D. Shen, M. Acharyya, J. Loughead, R. Gur, and D. Langleben. Classifying spatial patterns of brain activity with machine learning methods: Application to lie detection. NeuroImage, 28(3):663--668, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. E. Formisano, F. D. Martino, and G. Valente. Multivariate analysis of fmri time series: classification and regression of brain responses using machine learning. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 26(7):921--934, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. I. Guyon and A. Elisseeff. An introduction to variable and feature selection. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:1157--1182, mar 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. T. A. Keller, M. A. Just, and V. A. Stenger. Reading span and the time-course of cortical activation in sentence-picture verification. Annual Convention of the Psychonomic Society, Orlando, FL, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Kudo and J. Sklansky. Comparison of algorithms that select features for pattern classifiers. Pattern Recognition, 33(1):25--41, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. T. M. Mitchell, R. Hutchinson, R. S. Niculescu, F. Pereira, X. Wang, M. Just, and S. Newman. Learning to decode cognitive states from brain images. Machine Learning, 57:145--175, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. Mourão-Miranda, A. L. Bokde, C. Born, H. Hampel, and M. Stetter. Classifying brain states and determining the discriminating activation patterns: Support vector machine on functional mri data. NeuroImage, 28(4):980--995, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. F. Pereira, T. Mitchell, and M. Botvinick. Machine learning classifiers and fmri: A tutorial overview. NeuroImage, 45(1, Supplement 1):S199 -- S209, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. R. Ramirez and M. Puiggros. A genetic programming approach to feature selection and classification of instantaneous cognitive states. In M. Giacobini, editor, Applications of Evolutionary Computing, volume 4448 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 311--319. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. W. Siedlecki and J. Sklansky. A note on genetic algorithms for large-scale feature selection. Pattern Recognition Letters, 10(5):335--347, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. D. Whitley. A genetic algorithm tutorial. Statistics and Computing, 4:65--85, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. D. Zongker and A. Jain. Algorithms for feature selection: An evaluation. In Pattern Recognition, 1996., Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on, volume 2, pages 18--22, aug 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Improving the performance of active voxel selection in the analysis of fMRI data using genetic algorithms

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      BCI '13: Proceedings of the 6th Balkan Conference in Informatics
      September 2013
      293 pages
      ISBN:9781450318518
      DOI:10.1145/2490257

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 19 September 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      BCI '13 Paper Acceptance Rate41of103submissions,40%Overall Acceptance Rate97of250submissions,39%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader