A Multilayer Sparse Representation of Dynamic Brain Functional Network Based on Hypergraph Theory for ADHD Classification

  • Yuduo Zhang
  • Zhichao LianEmail author
  • Chanying Huang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11936)


Nowadays, studies on the brain show that the resting brain is still dynamic, and the dynamics of brain functional connectivity remains to be proven, which is very important for the research and diagnosis of mental disorders. In this paper, we apply the Bayesian Connection Change Point Model (BCCPM) to perform dynamic testing on the brain. A sparse model is used to construct a hypergraph to represent the brain function connectivity network, and then the dictionary obtained by sparse learning is used to further extract the features of brain function network. The experimental results on ADHD data show that the accuracy of the proposed method has been improved. Meanwhile, we find that there are obvious differences in the sparse features values of the brain functional networks between patients and normal controls. In addition, the comparison between the proposed method with/without the BCCPM demonstrated the importance of dynamic detection further.


ADHD BCCPM Hyper network Sparse representation 


  1. 1.
    Song, M., Du, H., Wu, N., et al.: Impaired resting-state functional integrations within default mode network of generalized tonic-clonic seizures epilepsy. PLoS ONE 6(2), 1729 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rashid, B., Arbabshirani, M.R., Damaraju, E., et al.: Classification of schizophrenia and bipolar patients using static and time-varying resting-state FMRI brain connectivity. In: IEEE, International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, pp. 645–657. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang, X., Ren, Y., Yang, Y., et al.: A weighted discriminative dictionary learning method for depression disorder classification using fMRI data. In: IEEE International Conferences on Big Data and Cloud Computing, pp. 618–623. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Golbabaei, S., Vahid, A., Hatami, J., et al.: Classification of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment: machine learning applied to rs-fMRI brain graphs. In: 2016 23rd Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering and 2016 1st International Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering (ICBME). IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cicek, G., Akan, A., Orman, Z.: Classification of ADHD by using textural analysis of MR images. In: Medical Technologies National Congress, pp. 1–4 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biswal, B., Yetkin, F.Z., Haughton, V.M., et al.: Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 34, 537–541 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raichle, M.E., Mintun, M.A.: Brain work and brain imaging. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 29, 449–476 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Allen, E.A., Damaraju, E., Plis, S.M., et al.: Tracking whole-brain connectivity dynamics in the resting state. Cereb. Cortex 24(3), 663–676 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang, X., Li, X., Jin, C., et al.: Identifying and characterizing resting state networks in temporally dynamic functional connectomes. Brain Topogr. 27(6), 747–765 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lian, Z., Li, X., Xing, J., et al.: Exploring functional brain dynamics via a Bayesian connectivity change point model. In: 2014 IEEE 11th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, ISBI 2014. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, Y., Lian, Z., Li, M., et al.: ELM-based classification of ADHD patients using a novel local feature extraction method. In: IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics & Biomedicine. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jie, B., Wee, C.Y., Shen, D., et al.: Hyper-connectivity of functional networks for brain disease diagnosis. Med. Image Anal. 32, 84–100 (2016). S1361841516300044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ke, M., Duan, X., Zhang, F., Yang, X.: Complex brain network of patients with epilepsy using cascading failure analysis of fMRI data. In: 2015 IEEE/ACIS 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD), Takamatsu, pp. 1–6 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bahramf, M., Hossein-Zadeh, G.: Functional parcellations affect the network measures in graph analysis of resting-state fMRI. In: 2014 21th Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering (ICBME), Tehran, pp. 263–268 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hiroyasu, T., Kohri, Y., Hiwa, S.: Sparse feature selection method by Pareto-front exploration—Extraction of functional brain network and ROI for fMRI data. In: 2017 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), Honolulu, HI, pp. 1–8 (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guo, H., Li, Y., Xu, Y., et al.: Resting-state brain functional hyper-network construction based on elastic net and group lasso methods. Front. Neuroinform. 12, 25 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, X., Guo, L., Li, X., et al.: Characterization of task-free and task-performance brain states via functional connectome patterns. Med. Image Anal. 17(8), 1106–1122 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, J., Ji, S., Ye, J.: SLEP: sparse learning with efficient projections. Comput. Sci. Eng. 61 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nanjing University of Science and TechnologyNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations