Correction: An Automated, Adaptive Framework for Optimizing Preprocessing Pipelines in Task-Based Functional MRI

There is an error in Fig 6. Please view the correct Fig 6 here. There is an error in the second paragraph of the Results section under the subheading Validation 2: Estimating Brain-Behaviour Correlations. The correct paragraph should read: Fig 6a plots the median (ρbehav, gSNRbehav,) values for PLS analysis of every task, and both GNB and CVA analysis models. In general, IND optimization improves model performance. It significantly improves ρbehav for all models (p<0.001, bootstrapped significance) except TMT+GNB (significant at p<0.001) and REC+CVA(non-significant at p = 0.28). It also significantly improves gSNRbehav for all models except SART+CVA (marginally worse at p = 0.03). Fig 6b plots Z-scored maps of brain regions with the greatest behavioural correlations, for each task and pipeline of the CVA model. For REC and TMT, we observe similar activation patterns between CONS and IND-D pipelines, although IND-D produces higher reproducible Z-scores and more extensive activation regions for all tasks. Whereas for SART, CONS produces more extensive activation than IND-D, albeit with limited spatial specificity.