Total Variation meets Sparsity: statistical learning with segmenting penalties

Prediction from medical images is a valuable aid to diagnosis. For instance, anatomical MR images can reveal certain disease conditions, while their functional counterparts can predict neuropsychi-atric phenotypes. However, a physician will not rely on predictions by black-box models: understanding the anatomical or functional features that underpin decision is critical. Generally, the weight vectors of clas-sifiers are not easily amenable to such an examination: Often there is no apparent structure. Indeed, this is not only a prediction task, but also an inverse problem that calls for adequate regularization. We address this challenge by introducing a convex region-selecting penalty. Our penalty combines total-variation regularization, enforcing spatial conti-guity, and 1 regularization, enforcing sparsity, into one group: Voxels are either active with non-zero spatial derivative or zero with inactive spatial derivative. This leads to segmenting contiguous spatial regions (inside which the signal can vary freely) against a background of zeros. Such segmentation of medical images in a target-informed manner is an important analysis tool. On several prediction problems from brain MRI, the penalty shows good segmentation. Given the size of medical images, computational efficiency is key. Keeping this in mind, we contribute an efficient optimization scheme that brings significant computational gains.

[1]  Mark W. Schmidt,et al.  Convergence Rates of Inexact Proximal-Gradient Methods for Convex Optimization , 2011, NIPS.

[2]  Luca Baldassarre,et al.  Structured Sparsity Models for Brain Decoding from fMRI Data , 2012, 2012 Second International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in NeuroImaging.

[3]  John G. Csernansky,et al.  Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS): Cross-sectional MRI Data in Young, Middle Aged, Nondemented, and Demented Older Adults , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[4]  Marc Teboulle,et al.  Fast Gradient-Based Algorithms for Constrained Total Variation Image Denoising and Deblurring Problems , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[5]  Brian B. Avants,et al.  Predicting Cognitive Data from Medical Images Using Sparse Linear Regression , 2013, IPMI.

[6]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Identifying Predictive Regions from fMRI with TV-L1 Prior , 2013, 2013 International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Neuroimaging.

[7]  Tony F. Chan,et al.  Active contours without edges , 2001, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[8]  A. Ishai,et al.  Distributed and Overlapping Representations of Faces and Objects in Ventral Temporal Cortex , 2001, Science.

[9]  Sabrina M. Tom,et al.  The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making Under Risk , 2007, Science.

[10]  Clifford R. Jack,et al.  Predicting Clinical Scores from Magnetic Resonance Scans in Alzheimer's Disease , 2010, NeuroImage.

[11]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Total Variation Regularization for fMRI-Based Prediction of Behavior , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  Patrick L. Combettes,et al.  Proximal Splitting Methods in Signal Processing , 2009, Fixed-Point Algorithms for Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering.

[13]  Masa-aki Sato,et al.  Sparse estimation automatically selects voxels relevant for the decoding of fMRI activity patterns , 2008, NeuroImage.

[14]  Jonathan E. Taylor,et al.  Interpretable whole-brain prediction analysis with GraphNet , 2013, NeuroImage.

[15]  L. Rudin,et al.  Nonlinear total variation based noise removal algorithms , 1992 .

[16]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Signal recovery from random projections , 2005, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[17]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Benchmarking solvers for TV-ℓ1 least-squares and logistic regression in brain imaging , 2014, 2014 International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Neuroimaging.