The Modulation of BOLD Variability between Cognitive States Varies by Age and Processing Speed
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".