Threshold-free cluster enhancement: Addressing problems of smoothing, threshold dependence and localisation in cluster inference

Many image enhancement and thresholding techniques make use of spatial neighbourhood information to boost belief in extended areas of signal. The most common such approach in neuroimaging is cluster-based thresholding, which is often more sensitive than voxel-wise thresholding. However, a limitation is the need to define the initial cluster-forming threshold. This threshold is arbitrary, and yet its exact choice can have a large impact on the results, particularly at the lower (e.g., t, z < 4) cluster-forming thresholds frequently used. Furthermore, the amount of spatial pre-smoothing is also arbitrary (given that the expected signal extent is very rarely known in advance of the analysis). In the light of such problems, we propose a new method which attempts to keep the sensitivity benefits of cluster-based thresholding (and indeed the general concept of "clusters" of signal), while avoiding (or at least minimising) these problems. The method takes a raw statistic image and produces an output image in which the voxel-wise values represent the amount of cluster-like local spatial support. The method is thus referred to as "threshold-free cluster enhancement" (TFCE). We present the TFCE approach and discuss in detail ROC-based optimisation and comparisons with cluster-based and voxel-based thresholding. We find that TFCE gives generally better sensitivity than other methods over a wide range of test signal shapes and SNR values. We also show an example on a real imaging dataset, suggesting that TFCE does indeed provide not just improved sensitivity, but richer and more interpretable output than cluster-based thresholding.

[1]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL , 2004, NeuroImage.

[2]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Detecting Activations in PET and fMRI: Levels of Inference and Power , 1996, NeuroImage.

[3]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Scale-Space and Edge Detection Using Anisotropic Diffusion , 1990, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[4]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Diffusion-based spatial priors for imaging , 2007, NeuroImage.

[5]  Timothy Edward John Behrens,et al.  Anatomically related grey and white matter abnormalities in adolescent-onset schizophrenia. , 2007, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[6]  Thierry Blu,et al.  WSPM: Wavelet-based statistical parametric mapping , 2007, NeuroImage.

[7]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Searching scale space for activation in PET images , 1996, Human brain mapping.

[8]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Voxel-Based Morphometric Study of Ageing in 465 Normal Adult Human Brains , 2001, NeuroImage.

[9]  F. Pesarin Multivariate Permutation Tests : With Applications in Biostatistics , 2001 .

[10]  John Suckling,et al.  Global, voxel, and cluster tests, by theory and permutation, for a difference between two groups of structural MR images of the brain , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Fully Bayesian spatio-temporal modeling of FMRI data , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  Beatriz Luna,et al.  Combining Brains: A Survey of Methods for Statistical Pooling of Information , 2002, NeuroImage.

[13]  G. Jogesh Babu,et al.  Multivariate Permutation Tests , 2002, Technometrics.

[14]  N V Hartvig,et al.  Spatial mixture modeling of fMRI data , 2000, Human brain mapping.

[15]  Allan Birnbaum,et al.  Combining Independent Tests of Significance , 1954 .

[16]  Jens Ledet Jensen,et al.  Spatial mixture modelling of fMRI data , 2000 .

[17]  R. D. Gordon Values of Mills' Ratio of Area to Bounding Ordinate and of the Normal Probability Integral for Large Values of the Argument , 1941 .

[18]  John F. Hamilton,et al.  A Free Response Approach To The Measurement And Characterization Of Radiographic Observer Performance , 1977, Other Conferences.

[19]  William D. Penny,et al.  Bayesian fMRI data analysis with sparse spatial basis function priors , 2007, NeuroImage.

[20]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  SUSAN—A New Approach to Low Level Image Processing , 1997, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[21]  T Lindeberg,et al.  Analysis of brain activation patterns using a 3‐D scale‐space primal sketch , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[22]  M. J. Fadili,et al.  A comparative evaluation of wavelet-based methods for hypothesis testing of brain activation maps , 2004, NeuroImage.

[23]  J. -B. Poline,et al.  Structural Group Analysis of Functional Activation Maps , 2000, NeuroImage.

[24]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Validating cluster size inference: random field and permutation methods , 2003, NeuroImage.

[25]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A unified statistical approach for determining significant signals in images of cerebral activation , 1996, Human brain mapping.

[26]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Assessing the significance of focal activations using their spatial extent , 1994, Human brain mapping.

[27]  D. Chakraborty,et al.  Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. , 1990, Radiology.