Understanding Dependency Patterns in Structural and Functional Brain Connectivity Through fMRI and DTI Data

  • Marta Crispino
  • Silvia D’Angelo
  • Saverio Ranciati
  • Antonietta Mira
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 257)


Neuroscience and neuroimaging have been providing new challenges for statisticians and quantitative researchers in general. As datasets of increasing complexity and dimension become available, the need for statistical techniques to analyze brain related phenomena becomes prominent. In this paper, we delve into data coming from functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI). The aim is to combine information from both sources in order to learn possible patterns of dependencies among regions of interest (ROIs) of the brain. First, we infer positions of these regions in a latent space, using the observed structural connectivity provided by the DTI data, to understand if physical spatial coordinates suitably reflect how ROIs are effectively interconnected. Secondly, we inspect Granger causality in the fMRI data in order to capture patterns of activations between ROIs. Then, we compare results from the analysis on these datasets, to find a link between functional and structural connectivity. Preliminary findings show that latent space positions well reflect hemisphere separation of the brain but are not perfectly connected to all the other structural partitions (that is, lobe, cortex, etc.); furthermore, activations of ROIs inferred from fMRI data are tied to observed structural connections derived from DTI scans.


Network analysis Resting state fMRI DTI Latent space models Penalized weighted regression 



Data were provided by Greg Kiar and Eric Bridgeford from NeuroData at Johns Hopkins University, who graciously preprocessed the raw DTI and R-fMRI imaging data available at We would like to thank Ritabrata Dutta for initial discussions during ‘StartUp Research’ and for comments to the final version of the manuscript. Also, we would like to thank the organizers of ‘StartUp Research’ event,, for creating the opportunity for this research contribution and the other working groups present at the event for fruitful discussions.

Supplementary material


  1. 1.
    Allman, J.M., Hakeem, A., Erwin, J.M., Nimchinsky, E., Hof, P.: The anterior cingulate cortex. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 935(1), 107–117 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bullmore, E., Sporns, O.: Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 10(3), 186–198 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cersosimo, M.G., Benarroch, E.E.: Chapter 5—central control of autonomic function and involvement in neurodegenerative disorders. Handbook Clin. Neurol. 117, 45–57 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Craddock, R.C., Jbabdi, S., Yan, C.G., Vogelstein, J.T., Castellanos, F.X., Di Martino, A., Kelly, C., Heberlein, K., Colcombe, S., Milham, M.P.: Imaging human connectomes at the macroscale. Nature Methods 10(6), 524–539 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crockford, D.N., Goodyear, B., Edwards, J., Quickfall, J., el Guebaly, N.: Cue-induced brain activity in pathological gamblers. Biological Psychiatry 58(10), 787–795 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Desikan, R.S., Ségonne, F., Fischl, B., Quinn, B.T., Dickerson, B.C., Blacker, D., Buckner, R.L., Dale, A.M., Maguire, R.P., Hyman, B.T., et al.: An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest. Neuroimage 31(3), 968–980 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Durante, D., Dunson, D.B.: Bayesian inference and testing of group differences in brain networks. Bayesian Anal. 13, 29–58 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Durante, D., Dunson, D.B., Vogelstein, J.T.: Nonparametric bayes modeling of populations of networks. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 112(520), 1516–1530 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Granger, C.W.: Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econom. J. Econom. Soci., 424–438 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Granger, C.W.: Testing for causality: a personal viewpoint. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 2, 329–352 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hall, E.C., Raskutti, G., Willett, R.: Inference of high-dimensional autoregressive generalized linear models (2016). arXiv:1605.02693
  12. 12.
    Han, F., Lu, H., Liu, H.: A direct estimation of high dimensional stationary vector autoregressions. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 16, 3115–3150 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Handcock, M.S., Raftery, A.E., Tantrum, J.M.: Model-based clustering for social networks. J. Royal Statist. Soc. Ser. A 170(2), 1–22 (2007)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoff, P.: Bilinear mixed-effects models for dyadic data. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 100(469), 286–295 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoff, P.D., Raftery, A.E., Handcock, M.S.: Latent space approaches to social network analysis. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 97(460), 1090–1098 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krivitsky, P.N., Handcock, M.S.: Fitting position latent cluster models for social networks with latentnet. J. Statist. Softw. 24(5) (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, Y., Niculescu-Mizil, A., Lozano, A.C., Lu, Y.: Learning temporal causal graphs for relational time-series analysis. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML2010), pp. 687–694 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ma, L., Hasan, K.M., Steinberg, J.L., Narayana, P.A., Lane, S.D., Zuniga, E.A., Kramer, L.A., Moeller, F.G.: Diffusion tensor imaging in cocaine dependence: regional effects of cocaine on corpus callosum and effect of cocaine administration route. Drug Alcohol Depend. 104(3), 262–267 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Menzler, K., Belke, M., Wehrmann, E., Krakow, K., Lengler, U., Jansen, A., Hamer, H., Oertel, W., Rosenow, F., Knake, S.: Men and women are different: diffusion tensor imaging reveals sexual dimorphism in the microstructure of the thalamus, corpus callosum and cingulum. Neuroimage 54(4), 2557–2562 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Monnig, M.A., Caprihan, A., Yeo, R.A., Gasparovic, C., Ruhl, D.A., Lysne, P., Bogenschutz, M.P., Hutchison, K.E., Thoma, R.J.: Diffusion tensor imaging of white matter networks in individuals with current and remitted alcohol use disorders and comorbid conditions. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 27(2), 455 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nowicki, K., Snijders, T.A.B.: Estimation and prediction of stochastic blockstructures. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 96(455), 1077–1087 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramsey, J.D., Hanson, S.J., Hanson, C., Halchenko, Y.O., Poldrack, R.A., Glymour, C.: Six problems for causal inference from FMRI. Neuroimage 49(2), 1545–1558 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rosenbloom, M., Sullivan, E.V., Pfefferbaum, A., et al.: Using magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging to assess brain damage in alcoholics. Alcohol Res. Health 27(2), 146–152 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shojaie, A., Michailidis, G.: Discovering graphical granger causality using the truncating lasso penalty. Bioinformatics 26(18), i517–i523 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Simpson, S.L., Bowman, F.D., Laurienti, P.J.: Analyzing complex functional brain networks: fusing statistics and network science to understand the brain. Statist. Surv. 7, 1 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith, S.M., Miller, K.L., Salimi-Khorshidi, G., Webster, M., Beckmann, C.F., Nichols, T.E., Ramsey, J.D., Woolrich, M.W.: Network modelling methods for fmri. Neuroimage 54(2), 875–891 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Snijders, T.A.B., Nowicki, K.: Estimation and prediction for stochastic bockmodels for graphs with latent block structure. J. Classif. 14(1), 75–100 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Song, L., Kolar, M., Xing, E.P.: Time-varying dynamic Bayesian networks. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 1732–1740 (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sporns, O.: Structure and function of complex brain networks. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 15(3), 247 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stam, C.J.: Modern network science of neurological disorders. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 15(10), 683–695 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tank, A., Fox, E.B., Shojaie, A.: Granger causality networks for categorical time series (2017). arXiv:1706.02781
  32. 32.
    Xue, G., Lu, Z., Levin, I.P., Bechara, A.: The impact of prior risk experiences on subsequent risky decision-making: the role of the insula. Neuroimage 50(2), 709–716 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marta Crispino
    • 1
  • Silvia D’Angelo
    • 2
  • Saverio Ranciati
    • 3
  • Antonietta Mira
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Inria, CNRS, LJKGrenobleFrance
  2. 2.Department of Statistical SciencesSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of Statistical SciencesUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  4. 4.Institute of Computational ScienceUniversità della Svizzera italianaLuganoSwitzerland
  5. 5.Department of Science and High TechnologyUniversità dell’InsubriaComoItaly

Personalised recommendations