henhaobio
Sign in

Nature CommunicationsBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article

Deep learning for brains?: Different linear and nonlinear scaling in UK Biobank brain images vs. machine-learning datasets

Marc-André SchulziD, B.T. Thomas YeoiD, Joshua T VogelsteiniD, Janaı́na Mourão-MirandaiD, Jakob Nikolas KatheriD, Konrad Paul KordingiD, Blake A. RichardsiD, Danilo BzdokiD

PDFDOIPreprint

Abstract

In recent years, deep learning has unlocked unprecedented success in various domains, especially in image, text, and speech processing. These breakthroughs may hold promise for neuroscience and especially for brain-imaging investigators who start to analyze thousands of participants. However, deep learning is only beneficial if the data have nonlinear relationships and if they are exploitable at currently available sample sizes. We systematically profiled the performance of deep models, kernel models, and linear models as a function of sample size on UK Biobank brain images against established machine learning references. On MNIST and Zalando Fashion, prediction accuracy consistently improved when escalating from linear models to shallow-nonlinear models, and further improved when switching to deep-nonlinear models. The more observations were available for model training, the greater the performance gain we saw. In contrast, using structural or functional brain scans, simple linear models performed on par with more complex, highly parameterized models in age/sex prediction across increasing sample sizes. In fact, linear models kept improving as the sample size approached [~]10,000 participants. Our results indicate that the increase in performance of linear models with additional data does not saturate at the limit of current feasibility. Yet, nonlinearities of common brain scans remain largely inaccessible to both kernel and deep learning methods at any examined scale.

Citations
314
FWCI
17.09
Field percentile
top 1%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISAbrol '21Peng '20Wen '17Dinsdale '20Majaj '18Hofmann '22
72% semantic matchNeuroscience
Anees Abrol, Zening Fu, Mustafa S. Salman+4 more·Nature Communications·Jan 13, 2021· 223 citations