Evaluation of the 3D fractal dimension as a marker of structural brain complexity in multiple-acquisition MRI
Stephan KrohniD, Martijn FroelingiD, Alexander LeemansiD, Dirk OstwaldiD, Pablo VillosladaiD, Carsten FinkeiD, Francisco José EstebaniD
Abstract
Fractal analysis represents a promising new approach to structural neuroimaging data, yet systematic evaluation of the fractal dimension (FD) as a marker of structural brain complexity is scarce. Here we present in-depth methodological assessment of FD estimation in structural brain MRI. On the computational side, we show that spatial scale optimization can significantly improve FD estimation accuracy, as suggested by simulation studies with known FD values. For empirical evaluation, we analyzed two recent open-access neuroimaging data sets (MASSIVE and Midnight Scan Club), stratified by fundamental image characteristics including registration, sequence weighting, spatial resolution, segmentation procedures, tissue type, and image complexity. Deviation analyses showed high repeated-acquisition stability of the FD estimates across both data sets, with differential deviation susceptibility according to image characteristics. While less frequently studied in the literature, FD estimation in T2-weighted images yielded robust outcomes. Importantly, we observed a significant impact of image registration on absolute FD estimates. Applying different registration schemes, we found that unbalanced registration induced i) repeated-measurement deviation clusters around the registration target, ii) strong bidirectional correlations among image analysis groups, and iii) spurious associations between the FD and an index of structural similarity, and these effects were strongly attenuated by reregistration in both data sets. Indeed, differences in FD between scans did not simply track differences in structure per se, suggesting that structural complexity and structural similarity represent distinct aspects of structural brain MRI. In conclusion, scale optimization can improve FD estimation accuracy, and empirical FD estimates are reliable yet sensitive to image characteristics.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 57
- FWCI
- 4.07
- Field percentile
- top 6%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
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.
Related papers
- Improving spatial normalization of brain diffusion MRI to measure longitudinal changes of tissue microstructure in the cortex and white matter.
Florencia Jacobacci, Jorge Jovicich, … Valeria Della‐Maggiore·Journal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingPeer-reviewed·Feb 14, 2020
- The variability of multidimensional diffusion-relaxation MRI estimates in the human brain
Eppu Manninen, Shunxing Bao, … Dan Benjamini·Imaging NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2024
- Magnetic resonance imaging datasets with anatomical fiducials for quality control and registration
Alaa Taha, Greydon Gilmore, … Jonathan C. Lau·Scientific DataPeer-reviewed·Jul 12, 2023
- A framework for evaluating correspondence between brain images using anatomical fiducials
Jonathan C. Lau, Andrew G. Parrent, … Terry M. Peters·Human Brain MappingPeer-reviewed·Jun 7, 2019
- Variations in Structural MRI Quality Significantly Impact Commonly-Used Measures of Brain Anatomy
Alysha D. Gilmore, Nicholas J. Buser, Jamie Lars Hanson·Brain InformaticsPeer-reviewed·Apr 15, 2021
- TRAMFIX: TRavelling Across Melbourne for FIXel-based analysis (a reproducibility study)
Remika Mito, Sila Genc, … Andrew Zalesky·bioRxiv·Jul 21, 2025