Back

The expected behaviour of random fields in high dimensions: contradictions in the results of Bansal and Peterson (2018)

Davenport, S. J.; Nichols, T. E.

2021-01-22 neuroscience
10.1101/2021.01.21.427611 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Bansal and Peterson (2018) found that in simple stationary Gaussian simulations Random Field Theory incorrectly estimates the number of clusters of a Gaussian field that lie above a threshold. Their results contradict the existing literature and appear to have arisen due to errors in their code. Using reproducible code we demonstrate that in their simulations Random Field Theory correctly predicts the expected number of clusters and therefore that many of their results are invalid.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 84 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.0%
2
Journal of Mathematical Biology
○ 37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.5%
3
PLOS ONE
● 4510 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.6%
4
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
5.0%
5
Journal of Computational Neuroscience
○ 23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
6
Scientific Reports
○ 3102 papers in training set
Top 21%
5.0%
7
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
◐ 351 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.7%
8
Journal of Neurophysiology
● 263 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
9
Entropy
○ 20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.5%
10
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
○ 38 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
11
Royal Society Open Science
● 193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
12
Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science
● 16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
13
Psychological Review
● 19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
14
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
15
Genetics
◐ 225 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
Brain Structure and Function
○ 83 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
17
Frontiers in Neuroscience
○ 223 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
18
Physical Review E
● 95 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
19
Biological Cybernetics
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
20
Cerebral Cortex
◐ 357 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Brain Sciences
○ 52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
PeerJ
◐ 261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
23
Neural Computation
● 36 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
24
Neuroscience
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
25
BMC Medical Education
○ 20 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
26
Peer Community Journal
● 254 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
27
Biomolecules
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
IFAC-PapersOnLine
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.7%
29
Physical Review Research
● 46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
30
Neural Networks
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%