MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of Optimal Structural Connectivity Using Functional Connectivity and Neural Modeling

2014· article· en· W2161460637 on OpenAlexaff
Gustavo Deco, Anthony R. McIntosh, Kelly Shen, R. Matthew Hutchison, Ravi S. Menon, Stefan Everling, P. Hagmann, Viktor Jirsa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersFP7 Information and Communication TechnologiesFondation LeenaardsJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceFunctional connectivityIdentification (biology)Function (biology)Perspective (graphical)Matrix (chemical analysis)Artificial neural networkField (mathematics)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceMathematicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complex network dynamics that arise from the interaction of the brain's structural and functional architectures give rise to mental function. Theoretical models demonstrate that the structure-function relation is maximal when the global network dynamics operate at a critical point of state transition. In the present work, we used a dynamic mean-field neural model to fit empirical structural connectivity (SC) and functional connectivity (FC) data acquired in humans and macaques and developed a new iterative-fitting algorithm to optimize the SC matrix based on the FC matrix. A dramatic improvement of the fitting of the matrices was obtained with the addition of a small number of anatomical links, particularly cross-hemispheric connections, and reweighting of existing connections. We suggest that the notion of a critical working point, where the structure-function interplay is maximal, may provide a new way to link behavior and cognition, and a new perspective to understand recovery of function in clinical conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations174
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207