Regularized partial correlation provides reliable functional connectivity estimates while correcting for widespread confounding

Functional connectivity (FC) has been invaluable for understanding the brain’s communication network, with strong potential for enhanced FC approaches to yield additional insights. Unlike with the fMRI field-standard method of pairwise correlation, theory suggests that partial correlation can estimate FC without confounded and indirect connections. However, partial correlation FC can also display low repeat reliability, impairing the accuracy of individual estimates. We hypothesized that reliability would be increased by adding regularization, which can reduce overfitting to noise in regression-based approaches like partial correlation. We therefore tested several regularized alternatives – graphical lasso, graphical ridge, and principal component regression – against unregularized partial and pairwise correlation, applying them to empirical resting-state fMRI and simulated data. As hypothesized, regularization vastly improved reliability, quantified using between-session similarity and intraclass correlation. This enhanced reliability then granted substantially more accurate individual FC estimates when validated against structural connectivity (empirical data) and ground truth networks (simulations). Graphical lasso showed especially high accuracy among regularized approaches, seemingly by maintaining more valid underlying network structures. We additionally found graphical lasso to be robust to noise levels, data quantity, and subject motion – common fMRI error sources. Lastly, we demonstrated that resting-state graphical lasso FC can effectively predict fMRI task activations and individual differences in behavior, further establishing its reliability, external validity, and ability to characterize task-related functionality. We recommend graphical lasso or similar regularized methods for calculating FC, as they can yield more valid estimates of unconfounded connectivity than field-standard pairwise correlation, while overcoming the poor reliability of unregularized partial correlation.

[1]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  Network modeling of dynamic brain interactions predicts emergence of neural information that supports human cognitive behavior , 2022, bioRxiv.

[2]  Timothy O. Laumann,et al.  Reproducible brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals , 2022, Nature.

[3]  Fabian Schaipp,et al.  GGLasso - a Python package for General Graphical Lasso computation , 2021, J. Open Source Softw..

[4]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  Causally informed activity flow models provide mechanistic insight into network-generated cognitive activations , 2021, NeuroImage.

[5]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  Latent functional connectivity underlying multiple brain states , 2021, bioRxiv.

[6]  I. Pardoe Applied Regression Modeling , 2020 .

[7]  D. Scheinost,et al.  A guide to the measurement and interpretation of fMRI test-retest reliability , 2020, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[8]  Wessel N. van Wieringen,et al.  rags2ridges: A One-Stop-Shop for Graphical Modeling of High-Dimensional Precision Matrices , 2020, 2010.05619.

[9]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  The Functional Relevance of Task-State Functional Connectivity , 2020, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  Danielle S. Bassett,et al.  Evaluating the sensitivity of functional connectivity measures to motion artifact in resting-state fMRI data , 2020, NeuroImage.

[11]  Thomas G. Dietterich,et al.  What Is Machine Learning? , 2019, Machine Learning and AI for Healthcare.

[12]  Francois Rheault,et al.  Common misconceptions, hidden biases and modern challenges of dMRI tractography , 2020, Journal of neural engineering.

[13]  A. Sayed,et al.  Revisiting correlation-based functional connectivity and its relationship with structural connectivity , 2020, Network Neuroscience.

[14]  Ruben Sanchez-Romero,et al.  Combining multiple functional connectivity methods to improve causal inferences , 2019, bioRxiv.

[15]  Daniele Marinazzo,et al.  Advancing functional connectivity research from association to causation , 2019, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Optimising network modelling methods for fMRI , 2019, NeuroImage.

[17]  Horacio G. Rotstein,et al.  Task-evoked activity quenches neural correlations and variability across cortical areas , 2019, bioRxiv.

[18]  Xue Ying,et al.  An Overview of Overfitting and its Solutions , 2019, Journal of Physics: Conference Series.

[19]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  Mapping the human brain's cortical-subcortical functional network organization , 2018, NeuroImage.

[20]  Essa Yacoub,et al.  The Lifespan Human Connectome Project in Aging: An overview , 2019, NeuroImage.

[21]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Extending the Human Connectome Project across ages: Imaging protocols for the Lifespan Development and Aging projects , 2018, NeuroImage.

[22]  Willem M Otte,et al.  A systematic review on the quantitative relationship between structural and functional network connectivity strength in mammalian brains , 2018, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[23]  Stephen M Smith,et al.  Spatial parcellations, spectral filtering, and connectivity measures in fMRI: Optimizing for discrimination , 2018, Human brain mapping.

[24]  Martin A. Lindquist,et al.  Improved estimation of subject-level functional connectivity using full and partial correlation with empirical Bayes shrinkage , 2018, NeuroImage.

[25]  Jonathan D. Power,et al.  Ridding fMRI data of motion-related influences: Removal of signals with distinct spatial and physical bases in multiecho data , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  Timothy O. Laumann,et al.  On Global fMRI Signals and Simulations , 2017, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  Peter F. Neher,et al.  The challenge of mapping the human connectome based on diffusion tractography , 2017, Nature Communications.

[28]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Benchmarking of participant-level confound regression strategies for the control of motion artifact in studies of functional connectivity , 2017, NeuroImage.

[29]  Andrew Zalesky,et al.  Building connectomes using diffusion MRI: why, how and but , 2017, NMR in biomedicine.

[30]  Yike Guo,et al.  Inferring functional connectivity in fMRI using minimum partial correlation , 2017, Int. J. Autom. Comput..

[31]  O. Sporns,et al.  Network neuroscience , 2017, Nature Neuroscience.

[32]  Jesper Andersson,et al.  A multi-modal parcellation of human cerebral cortex , 2016, Nature.

[33]  Chad J. Donahue,et al.  Using Diffusion Tractography to Predict Cortical Connection Strength and Distance: A Quantitative Comparison with Tracers in the Monkey , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Michael W. Cole,et al.  Activity flow over resting-state networks shapes cognitive task activations , 2016, Nature Neuroscience.

[35]  Yikai Wang,et al.  An Efficient and Reliable Statistical Method for Estimating Functional Connectivity in Large Scale Brain Networks Using Partial Correlation , 2016, Front. Neurosci..

[36]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Partial covariance based functional connectivity computation using Ledoit–Wolf covariance regularization , 2015, NeuroImage.

[37]  Jonathan D. Power,et al.  Recent progress and outstanding issues in motion correction in resting state fMRI , 2015, NeuroImage.

[38]  Jonathan D. Power,et al.  Intrinsic and Task-Evoked Network Architectures of the Human Brain , 2014, Neuron.

[39]  Mary E. Meyerand,et al.  The effect of scan length on the reliability of resting-state fMRI connectivity estimates , 2013, NeuroImage.

[40]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Functional connectomics from resting-state fMRI , 2013, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[41]  Timothy D. Verstynen,et al.  Deterministic Diffusion Fiber Tracking Improved by Quantitative Anisotropy , 2013, PloS one.

[42]  C. Harada,et al.  Normal cognitive aging. , 2013, Clinics in geriatric medicine.

[43]  Steen Moeller,et al.  Advances in diffusion MRI acquisition and processing in the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[44]  Mark Jenkinson,et al.  The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[45]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Utility of Partial Correlation for Characterising Brain Dynamics: MVPA-based Assessment of Regularisation and Network Selection , 2013, 2013 International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Neuroimaging.

[46]  N. Fox,et al.  Cognition assessment using the NIH Toolbox , 2013, Neurology.

[47]  Hernando Ombao,et al.  Quantifying temporal correlations: A test–retest evaluation of functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI , 2013, NeuroImage.

[48]  Heidi Johansen-Berg,et al.  Diffusion MRI at 25: Exploring brain tissue structure and function , 2012, NeuroImage.

[49]  Edward T. Bullmore,et al.  On the use of correlation as a measure of network connectivity , 2012, NeuroImage.

[50]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Spurious but systematic correlations in functional connectivity MRI networks arise from subject motion , 2012, NeuroImage.

[51]  Kaustubh Supekar,et al.  Estimation of functional connectivity in fMRI data using stability selection-based sparse partial correlation with elastic net penalty , 2012, NeuroImage.

[52]  O. Sporns,et al.  Rich-Club Organization of the Human Connectome , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[53]  Karl J. Friston Functional and Effective Connectivity: A Review , 2011, Brain Connect..

[54]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Network modelling methods for FMRI , 2011, NeuroImage.

[55]  Rina Foygel,et al.  Extended Bayesian Information Criteria for Gaussian Graphical Models , 2010, NIPS.

[56]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Brain covariance selection: better individual functional connectivity models using population prior , 2010, NIPS.

[57]  T. Salthouse Selective review of cognitive aging , 2010, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[58]  Hernando Ombao,et al.  Functional connectivity: Shrinkage estimation and randomization test , 2010, NeuroImage.

[59]  Motoaki Kawanabe,et al.  Modeling Sparse Connectivity Between Underlying Brain Sources for EEG/MEG , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[60]  R. Kahn,et al.  Functionally linked resting‐state networks reflect the underlying structural connectivity architecture of the human brain , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[61]  M. Greicius,et al.  Greater than the sum of its parts: a review of studies combining structural connectivity and resting-state functional connectivity , 2009, Brain Structure and Function.

[62]  O. Sporns,et al.  Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[63]  O Sporns,et al.  Predicting human resting-state functional connectivity from structural connectivity , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[64]  Kevin Murphy,et al.  The impact of global signal regression on resting state correlations: Are anti-correlated networks introduced? , 2009, NeuroImage.

[65]  P. Nunez,et al.  EEG and MEG coherence: Measures of functional connectivity at distinct spatial scales of neocortical dynamics , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[66]  Thomas T. Liu,et al.  A component based noise correction method (CompCor) for BOLD and perfusion based fMRI , 2007, NeuroImage.

[67]  Philip D. Harvey,et al.  Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test , 2006, Nature Protocols.

[68]  Habib Benali,et al.  Partial correlation for functional brain interactivity investigation in functional MRI , 2006, NeuroImage.

[69]  H. Zou,et al.  Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net , 2005 .

[70]  Olivier Ledoit,et al.  Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection , 2003 .

[71]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[72]  B. Biswal,et al.  Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo‐planar mri , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[73]  I. Jolliffe A Note on the Use of Principal Components in Regression , 1982 .

[74]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[75]  A. E. Hoerl,et al.  Ridge Regression: Applications to Nonorthogonal Problems , 1970 .

[76]  W. Revelle psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research , 2017 .

[77]  Thomas J. Bouchard,et al.  Still just 1 g: Consistent results from five test batteries , 2008 .

[78]  R. Tibshirani Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the Lasso , 1996 .

[79]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[80]  Xiao-Li Meng,et al.  Comparing correlated correlation coefficients , 1992 .

[81]  A. Rey L'examen psychologique dans les cas d'encéphalopathie traumatique. (Les problems.). , 1941 .