The Modulation of BOLD Variability between Cognitive States Varies by Age and Processing Speed
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests that brain variability plays a number of important functional roles for neural systems. However, the relationship between brain variability and changing cognitive demands remains understudied. In the current study, we demonstrate experimental condition-based modulation in brain variability using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Within a sample of healthy younger and older adults, we found that blood oxygen level-dependent signal variability was an effective discriminator between fixation and external cognitive demand. Across a number of regions, brain variability increased broadly on task compared with fixation, particularly in younger and faster performing adults. Conversely, older and slower performing adults exhibited fewer changes in brain variability within and across experimental conditions and brain regions, indicating a reduction in variability-based neural specificity. Increases in brain variability on task may represent a more complex neural system capable of greater dynamic range between brain states, as well as an enhanced ability to efficiently process varying and unexpected external stimuli. The current results help establish the developmental and performance correlates of state-to-state brain variability-based transitions and offer a new line of inquiry in the study of rest versus task modes in the human brain.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it