MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280240758 · doi:10.1089/brain.2014.0331

Partial Correlation-Based Retinotopically Organized Resting-State Functional Connectivity Within and Between Areas of the Visual Cortex Reflects More Than Cortical Distance

2015· article· en· W2280240758 on OpenAlexafffund
Debra Ann Dawson, Jack Lam, Lindsay B. Lewis, Félix Carbonell, Janine D. Mendola, Amir Shmuel

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Connectivity · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Eye InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPartial correlationCorrelationFunctional magnetic resonance imagingVisual cortexResting state fMRINeuroscienceFunctional connectivityBrain mappingPsychologyMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous studies have demonstrated functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)-based resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) between cortical areas. Recent evidence suggests that synchronous fluctuations in blood oxygenation level-dependent fMRI reflect functional organization at a scale finer than that of visual areas. In this study, we investigated whether RSFCs within and between lower visual areas are retinotopically organized and whether retinotopically organized RSFC merely reflects cortical distance. Subjects underwent retinotopic mapping and separately resting-state fMRI. Visual areas V1, V2, and V3, were subdivided into regions of interest (ROIs) according to quadrants and visual field eccentricity. Functional connectivity (FC) was computed based on Pearson's linear correlation (correlation), and Pearson's linear partial correlation (correlation between two time courses after the time courses from all other regions in the network are regressed out). Within a quadrant, within visual areas, all correlation and nearly all partial correlation FC measures showed statistical significance. Consistently in V1, V2, and to a lesser extent in V3, correlation decreased with increasing eccentricity separation. Consistent with previously reported monkey anatomical connectivity, correlation/partial correlation values between regions from adjacent areas (V1-V2 and V2-V3) were higher than those between nonadjacent areas (V1-V3). Within a quadrant, partial correlation showed consistent significance between regions from two different areas with the same or adjacent eccentricities. Pairs of ROIs with similar eccentricity showed higher correlation/partial correlation than pairs distant in eccentricity. Between dorsal and ventral quadrants, partial correlation between common and adjacent eccentricity regions within a visual area showed statistical significance; this extended to more distant eccentricity regions in V1. Within and between quadrants, correlation decreased approximately linearly with increasing distances separating the tested ROIs. Partial correlation showed a more complex dependence on cortical distance: it decreased exponentially with increasing distance within a quadrant, but was best fit by a quadratic function between quadrants. We conclude that RSFCs within and between lower visual areas are retinotopically organized. Correlation-based FC is nonselectively high across lower visual areas, even between regions that do not share direct anatomical connections. The mechanisms likely involve network effects caused by the dense anatomical connectivity within this network and projections from higher visual areas. FC based on partial correlation, which minimizes network effects, follows expectations based on direct anatomical connections in the monkey visual cortex better than correlation. Last, partial correlation-based retinotopically organized RSFC reflects more than cortical distance effects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain ConnectivitySame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207