Computational neuroimaging strategies for single patient predictions.

Neuroimaging increasingly exploits machine learning techniques in an attempt to achieve clinically relevant single-subject predictions. An alternative to machine learning, which tries to establish predictive links between features of the observed data and clinical variables, is the deployment of computational models for inferring on the (patho)physiological and cognitive mechanisms that generate behavioural and neuroimaging responses. This paper discusses the rationale behind a computational approach to neuroimaging-based single-subject inference, focusing on its potential for characterising disease mechanisms in individual subjects and mapping these characterisations to clinical predictions. Following an overview of two main approaches - Bayesian model selection and generative embedding - which can link computational models to individual predictions, we review how these methods accommodate heterogeneity in psychiatric and neurological spectrum disorders, help avoid erroneous interpretations of neuroimaging data, and establish a link between a mechanistic, model-based approach and the statistical perspectives afforded by machine learning.

Confidence and psychosis: a neuro-computational account of contingency learning disruption by NMDA blockade.

A state of pathological uncertainty about environmental regularities might represent a key step in the pathway to psychotic illness. Early psychosis can be investigated in healthy volunteers under ketamine, an NMDA receptor antagonist. Here, we explored the effects of ketamine on contingency learning using a placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover design. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, participants performed an instrumental learning task, in which cue-outcome contingencies were probabilistic and reversed between blocks. Bayesian model comparison indicated that in such an unstable environment, reinforcement learning parameters are downregulated depending on confidence level, an adaptive mechanism that was specifically disrupted by ketamine administration. Drug effects were underpinned by altered neural activity in a fronto-parietal network, which reflected the confidence-based shift to exploitation of learned contingencies. Our findings suggest that an early characteristic of psychosis lies in a persistent doubt that undermines the stabilization of behavioral policy resulting in a failure to exploit regularities in the environment.

Dynamic causal modelling of brain-behaviour relationships.

In this work, we expose a mathematical treatment of brain-behaviour relationships, which we coin behavioural Dynamic Causal Modelling or bDCM. This approach aims at decomposing the brain's transformation of stimuli into behavioural outcomes, in terms of the relative contribution of brain regions and their connections. In brief, bDCM places the brain at the interplay between stimulus and behaviour: behavioural outcomes arise from coordinated activity in (hidden) neural networks, whose dynamics are driven by experimental inputs. Estimating neural parameters that control network connectivity and plasticity effectively performs a neurobiologically-constrained approximation to the brain's input-outcome transform. In other words, neuroimaging data essentially serves to enforce the realism of bDCM's decomposition of input-output relationships. In addition, post-hoc artificial lesions analyses allow us to predict induced behavioural deficits and quantify the importance of network features for funnelling input-output relationships. This is important, because this enables one to bridge the gap with neuropsychological studies of brain-damaged patients. We demonstrate the face validity of the approach using Monte-Carlo simulations, and its predictive validity using empirical fMRI/behavioural data from an inhibitory control task. Lastly, we discuss promising applications of this work, including the assessment of functional degeneracy (in the healthy brain) and the prediction of functional recovery after lesions (in neurological patients).

Bayesian model selection for group studies - revisited.

In this paper, we revisit the problem of Bayesian model selection (BMS) at the group level. We originally addressed this issue in Stephan et al. (2009), where models are treated as random effects that could differ between subjects, with an unknown population distribution. Here, we extend this work, by (i) introducing the Bayesian omnibus risk (BOR) as a measure of the statistical risk incurred when performing group BMS, (ii) highlighting the difference between random effects BMS and classical random effects analyses of parameter estimates, and (iii) addressing the problem of between group or condition model comparisons. We address the first issue by quantifying the chance likelihood of apparent differences in model frequencies. This leads to the notion of protected exceedance probabilities. The second issue arises when people want to ask "whether a model parameter is zero or not" at the group level. Here, we provide guidance as to whether to use a classical second-level analysis of parameter estimates, or random effects BMS. The third issue rests on the evidence for a difference in model labels or frequencies across groups or conditions. Overall, we hope that the material presented in this paper finesses the problems of group-level BMS in the analysis of neuroimaging and behavioural data.