ArticleNeuroImage2024
Stacked regressions and structured variance partitioning for interpretable brain maps.
Article in NeuroImage, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pregistered movie-fMRI analyses reveal altered visual feature encoding in autism in pSTS.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Cross-modal deep generative models reveal the cortical representation of dancing.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Low-Rank Tensor Encoding Models Decompose Natural Speech Comprehension Processes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Net2Brain: a toolbox to compare artificial vision models with human brain responses.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2025Article
- Second Sight: Using brain-optimized encoding models to align image distributions with human brain activity.ArXiv · 2023Article
- Scaling laws for language encoding models in fMRI.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Relating brain activity associated with a complex stimulus to different properties of that stimulus is a powerful approach for constructing functional brain maps. However, when stimuli are naturalistic, their properties are often correlated (e.g., visual and semantic features of natural images, or different layers of a convolutional neural network that are used as features of images). Correlated properties can act as confounders for each other and complicate the interpretability of brain maps, and can impact the robustness of statistical estimators. Here, we present an approach for brain mapping based on two proposed methods: stacking different encoding models and structured variance partitioning. Our stacking algorithm combines encoding models that each uses as input a feature space that describes a different stimulus attribute. The algorithm learns to predict the activity of a voxel as a linear combination of the outputs of different encoding models. We show that the resulting combined model can predict held-out brain activity better or at least as well as the individual encoding models. Further, the weights of the linear combination are readily interpretable; they show the importance of each feature space for predicting a voxel. We then build on our stacking models to introduce structured variance partitioning, a new type of variance partitioning that takes into account the known relationships between features. Our approach constrains the size of the hypothesis space and allows us to ask targeted questions about the similarity between feature spaces and brain regions even in the presence of correlations between the feature spaces. We validate our approach in simulation, showcase its brain mapping potential on fMRI data, and release a Python package. Our methods can be useful for researchers interested in aligning brain activity with different layers of a neural network, or with other types of correlated feature spaces.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.