Cognitive and default‐mode resting state networks: Do male and female brains “rest” differently?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variability in human behavior related to sex is supported by neuroimaging studies showing differences in brain activation patterns during cognitive task performance. An emerging field is examining the human connectome, including networks of brain regions that are not only temporally-correlated during different task conditions, but also networks that show highly correlated spontaneous activity during a task-free state. Both task-related and task-free network activity has been associated with individual task performance and behavior under certain conditions. Therefore, our aim was to determine whether sex differences exist during a task-free resting state for two networks associated with cognitive task performance (executive control network (ECN), salience network (SN)) and the default mode network (DMN). Forty-nine healthy subjects (26 females, 23 males) underwent a 5-min task-free fMRI scan in a 3T MRI. An independent components analysis (ICA) was performed to identify the best-fit IC for each network based on specific spatial nodes defined in previous studies. To determine the consistency of these networks across subjects we performed self-organizing group-level ICA analyses. There were no significant differences between sexes in the functional connectivity of the brain areas within the ECN, SN, or the DMN. These important findings highlight the robustness of intrinsic connectivity of these resting state networks and their similarity between sexes. Furthermore, our findings suggest that resting state fMRI studies do not need to be controlled for sex.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".