SPICE: Fast parametric inference of significance for spatial associations between brain maps
Liu, Y.; Zalesky, A.
Show abstract
Testing for spatial correlations between pairs of brain maps has emerged as a central task in neuroimaging studies. Determining the statistical significance of such correlations is challenging due to the presence of spatial autocorrelation in brain maps. Here we establish a novel parametric method, Parametric Spatial Test for Associations (PaSTA), to infer the significance of spatial associations between brain maps via covariance-variance modelling and effective degrees of freedom estimation. Our method is fast, reliable, and sensitive, enabling flexible significance testing of brain map correlations over arbitrary cortical surface and brain volumetric domains. We examine the sensitivity and specificity of PaSTA using simulated datasets with known ground truth and demonstrate its utility when applied to empirical brain maps. We extend PaSTA to approximately model modest nonstationarity in spatial autocorrelation and show that, our method yields improved false positive control and statistical power relative to existing approaches when brain maps are spatially heterogeneous.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Mapping individual differences in intermodal coupling in neurodevelopment 95%
- The Individualized Neural Tuning Model: Precise and generalizable cartography of functional architecture in individual brains 95%
- Evaluating functional brain organization in individuals and identifying contributions to network overlap 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Using structural connectivity to augment community structure in EEG functional connectivity 95%
- Coming up short: generative network models fail to accurately capture long-range connectivity 95%
- Deconstructing the Mapper algorithm to extract richer topological and temporal features from functional neuroimaging data 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.