Liegeois, R. | bioRxiv Science

bioRxiv2018

Dynamic mode decomposition of resting-state and task fMRI

Component analysis is a powerful tool to identify dominant patterns of interactions in multivariate datasets. In the context of fMRI data, methods such as principal component analysis or independent component analysis have been used to identify the brain networks shaping functional connectivity (FC). Importantly, these approaches are static in the sense that they ignore the temporal information contained in fMRI time series. Therefore, the corresponding components provide a static characterization of FC. Building upon recent findings suggesting that FC dynamics encode richer information about brain functional organization, we use a dynamic extension of component analysis to identify dynamic modes (DMs) of fMRI time series. We demonstrate the feasibility and relevance of this approach using resting-state and motor-task fMRI data of 730 healthy subjects of the Human Connectome Project (HCP). In resting-state, dominant DMs have strong resemblance with classical resting-state networks, with an additional temporal characterization of the networks in terms of oscillatory periods and damping times. In motor-task conditions, dominant DMs reveal interactions between several brain areas, including but not limited to the posterior parietal cortex and primary motor areas, that are not found with classical activation maps. Finally, we identify two canonical components linking the temporal properties of the resting-state DMs with 158 behavioral and demographic HCP measures. Altogether, these findings illustrate the benefits of the proposed dynamic component analysis framework, making it a promising tool to characterize the spatio-temporal organization of brain activity.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2017

Interpreting Temporal Fluctuations In Resting-State Functional Connectivity MRI

Resting-state functional connectivity is a powerful tool for studying human functional brain networks. Temporal fluctuations in functional connectivity, i.e., dynamic functional connectivity (dFC), are thought to reflect dynamic changes in brain organization and non-stationary switching of discrete brain states. However, recent studies have suggested that dFC might be attributed to sampling variability of static FC. Despite this controversy, a detailed exposition of stationarity and statistical testing of dFC is lacking in the literature. This article seeks an in-depth exploration of these statistical issues at a level appealing to both neuroscientists and statisticians.\n\nWe first review the statistical notion of stationarity, emphasizing its reliance on ensemble statistics. In contrast, all FC measures depend on sample statistics. An important consequence is that the space of stationary signals is much broader than expected, e.g., encompassing hidden markov models (HMM) widely used to extract discrete brain states. In other words, stationarity does not imply the absence of brain states. We then expound the assumptions underlying the statistical testing of dFC. It turns out that the two popular frameworks - phase randomization (PR) and autoregressive randomization (ARR) - generate stationary, linear, Gaussian null data. Therefore, statistical rejection can be due to non-stationarity, nonlinearity and/or non-Gaussianity. For example, the null hypothesis can be rejected for the stationary HMM due to nonlinearity and non-Gaussianity. Finally, we show that a common form of ARR (bivariate ARR) is susceptible to false positives compared with PR and an adapted version of ARR (multivariate ARR).\n\nApplication of PR and multivariate ARR to Human Connectome Project data suggests that the stationary, linear, Gaussian null hypothesis cannot be rejected for most participants. However, failure to reject the null hypothesis does not imply that static FC can fully explain dFC. We find that first order AR models explain temporal FC fluctuations significantly better than static FC models. Since first order AR models encode both static FC and one-lag FC, this suggests the presence of dynamical information beyond static FC. Furthermore, even in subjects where the null hypothesis was rejected, AR models explain temporal FC fluctuations significantly better than a popular HMM, suggesting the lack of discrete states (as measured by resting-state fMRI). Overall, our results suggest that AR models are not only useful as a means for generating null data, but may be a powerful tool for exploring the dynamical properties of resting-state fMRI. Finally, we discuss how apparent contradictions in the growing dFC literature might be reconciled.

neuroscience↗