Detection of Brain Functional-Connectivity Difference in Post-stroke Patients Using Group-Level Covariance Modeling

  • Gaël Varoquaux
  • Flore Baronnet
  • Andreas Kleinschmidt
  • Pierre Fillard
  • Bertrand Thirion
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6361)


Functional brain connectivity, as revealed through distant correlations in the signals measured by functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), is a promising source of biomarkers of brain pathologies. However, establishing and using diagnostic markers requires probabilistic inter-subject comparisons. Principled comparison of functional-connectivity structures is still a challenging issue. We give a new matrix-variate probabilistic model suitable for inter-subject comparison of functional connectivity matrices on the manifold of Symmetric Positive Definite (SPD) matrices. We show that this model leads to a new algorithm for principled comparison of connectivity coefficients between pairs of regions. We apply this model to comparing separately post-stroke patients to a group of healthy controls. We find neurologically-relevant connection differences and show that our model is more sensitive that the standard procedure. To the best of our knowledge, these results are the first report of functional connectivity differences between a single-patient and a group and thus establish an important step toward using functional connectivity as a diagnostic tool.


Functional Connectivity Tangent Space Correlation Matrice Principled Comparison Multivariate Normal Distribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Greicius, M.: Resting-state functional connectivity in neuropsychiatric disorders. Current opinion in neurology 21, 424 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vanhaudenhuyse, A., et al.: Default network connectivity reflects level of consciousness in non-communicative brain-damaged patients. Brain 133, 161 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fair, D., et al.: Development of distinct control networks through segregation and integration. PNAS 104, 13507 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Uddin, L., Menon, V.: The anterior insula in autism: Under-connected and under-examined. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 33, 1198–1203 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sato, J., et al.: An fMRI normative database for connectivity networks using one-class support vector machines. Human brain mapping 30, 1068 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rocca, M., et al.: Altered functional and structural connectivities in patients with MS: a 3-T study. Neurology 69, 2136 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lenglet, C., et al.: Statistics on the manifold of multivariate normal distributions: Theory and application to diffusion tensor MRI processing. Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision 25, 423–444 (2006)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pennec, X., Fillard, P., Ayache, N.: A Riemannian framework for tensor computing. International Journal of Computer Vision 66, 41–66 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ledoit, O., Wolf, M.: A well-conditioned estimator for large-dimensional covariance matrices. J. Multivar. Anal. 88, 365–411 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fletcher, P., Joshi, S.: Riemannian geometry for the statistical analysis of diffusion tensor data. Signal Processing 87, 250–262 (2007)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gaël Varoquaux
    • 1
  • Flore Baronnet
    • 2
  • Andreas Kleinschmidt
    • 2
  • Pierre Fillard
    • 1
  • Bertrand Thirion
    • 1
  1. 1.Parietal project-teamINRIASaclay-île de FranceFrance
  2. 2.INSERM, U562Gif-Sur-YvetteFrance

Personalised recommendations