Patient-specific connectivity pattern of epileptic network in frontal lobe epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is evidence that focal epilepsy may involve the dysfunction of a brain network in addition to the focal region. To delineate the characteristics of this epileptic network, we collected EEG/fMRI data from 23 patients with frontal lobe epilepsy. For each patient, EEG/fMRI analysis was first performed to determine the BOLD response to epileptic spikes. The maximum activation cluster in the frontal lobe was then chosen as the seed to identify the epileptic network in fMRI data. Functional connectivity analysis seeded at the same region was also performed in 63 healthy control subjects. Nine features were used to evaluate the differences of epileptic network patterns in three connection levels between patients and controls. Compared with control subjects, patients showed overall more functional connections between the epileptogenic region and the rest of the brain and higher laterality. However, the significantly increased connections were located in the neighborhood of the seed, but the connections between the seed and remote regions actually decreased. Comparing fMRI runs with interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs) and without IEDs, the patient-specific connectivity pattern was not changed significantly. These findings regarding patient-specific connectivity patterns of epileptic networks in FLE reflect local high connectivity and connections with distant regions differing from those of healthy controls. Moreover, the difference between the two groups in most features was observed in the strictest of the three connection levels. The abnormally high connectivity might reflect a predominant attribute of the epileptic network, which may facilitate propagation of epileptic activity among regions in the network.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".