Constructing Brain Connectivity Graph by Modified Sparse Representation

  • Jing Ren
  • Haixian Wang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8226)


In the field of neuroimaging, fMRI is an important tool for brain connectivity analysis. However, the architecture of functional connectivity within the human brain connectome cannot be exactly interpreted at the voxel level by using the traditional correlation analysis. To address this problem, we propose a modified sparse representation (MSR) method to construct the connectivity graph in an automatical and efficient way. The MSR approach uses the sparse representation instead of the correlation coefficient to relate brain regions or voxels. Degree centrality (DC), closeness centrality (CC), betweenness centrality (BC), and eigenvector centrality (EC) are employed to extract the features of fMRI connective patterns. With the extracted features, we then experimentally compare affirmative and negative sentences processing on the Star/Plus database, which shows significant difference via MSR method. Compared with the traditional correlation method, MSR shows higher significance between the two cognitive processing tasks.


modified sparse representation degree centrality closeness centrality betweenness centrality eigenvector centrality 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Shirer, W.R., Ryail, S., Rykhlevskaia, E.: Decoding Subject-driven Cognitive States with Whole-brain Connectivity Patterns. Cerebral Cortex 22, 158–165 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Horwitz, B., Horovitz, S.G.: Introduction to Research Topic–Brain Connectivity Analysis: Investigating Brain Disorders. Part 1: The Review Articles. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 6, 1–2 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ryali, S., Chen, T.W., Kaustubh, S.: Estimation of Functional Connectivity in fMRI Data Using Stability Selection-based Sparse Partial Correlation with Elastic Net Penalty. Neuroimage 59, 3852–3861 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norman, K.A., Polyn, S.M., Detre, G.J.: Beyond Mind-reading: Multi-voxel Pattern Analysis of fMRI Data. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10, 424–430 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, J., Cheng, W., Wang, Z.G.: Pattern Classification of Large-scale Functional Brain Networks: Identification of Informative Neuroimaging Markers for Epilepsy. PLoS One 7, e36733 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bullmore, E., Sporns, O.: Complex Brain Networks: Graph Theoretical Analysis of Structural and Functional Systems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 10, 186–198 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Qiao, L., Chen, S., Tan, X.: Sparsity Preserving Projections with Applications to Face Recognition. Pattern Recognition 43, 331–341 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donoho, D.L., Tsaig, Y.: Fast Solution of l1-norm Minimization Problems When the Solution May Be Sparse. Department of Statistics, Stanford University (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lohmann, G., Margulies, D.S., Horstmann, A.: Eigenvector Centrality Mapping for Analyzing Connectivity Patterns in fMRI Data of the Human Brain. PLoS One 5, e10232 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Druckmann, S., Chklovskii, D.B.: Over-complete Representations on Recurrent Neural Networks Can Support Persistent Percepts. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 23, 541–549 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Richiardi, J., Van De Ville, D., Eryilmaz, H.: Low-dimensional Embedding of Functional Connectivity Graphs for Brain State Decoding. In: 2010 First Workshop on. 2010 Brain Decoding: Pattern Recognition Challenges in Neuroimaging (WBD). IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Donoho, D.L.: Compressed Sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 52, 1289–1306 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bonacich, P., Lloyd, P.: Calculating Status with Negative Relations. Social Networks 26, 331–338 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buckner, R.L., Sepulcre, J., Talukdar, T.: Cortical Hubs Revealed by Intrinsic Functional Connectivity: Mapping, Assessment of Stability, and Relation to Alzheimer’s Disease. The Journal of Neuroscience 29, 1860–1873 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    MacLeod, C.M., Hunt, E.B., Mathews, N.N.: Individual Differences in the Verification of Sentence-Picture Relationships. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17, 493–507 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Napoletani, D., Sauer, T.D.: Reconstructing the Topology of Sparsely Connected Dynamical Networks. Physical Review-Section E-Statistical Nonlinear and Soft Matter Physics 77, 26103 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salvador, R., Suckling, J., Schwarzbauer, C.: Undirected Graphs of Frequency-dependent Functional Connectivity in Whole Brain Networks. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360, 937–946 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jing Ren
    • 1
  • Haixian Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Child Development and Learning Science of Ministry of Education, Research Center for Learning ScienceSoutheast UniversityNanjingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations