Dynamic functional connectivity shapes individual differences in associative learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current neuroscientific research has shown that the brain reconfigures its functional interactions at multiple timescales. Here, we sought to link transient changes in functional brain networks to individual differences in behavioral and cognitive performance by using an active learning paradigm. Participants learned associations between pairs of unrelated visual stimuli by using feedback. Interindividual behavioral variability was quantified with a learning rate measure. By using a multivariate statistical framework (partial least squares), we identified patterns of network organization across multiple temporal scales (within a trial, millisecond; across a learning session, minute) and linked these to the rate of change in behavioral performance (fast and slow). Results indicated that posterior network connectivity was present early in the trial for fast, and later in the trial for slow performers. In contrast, connectivity in an associative memory network (frontal, striatal, and medial temporal regions) occurred later in the trial for fast, and earlier for slow performers. Time-dependent changes in the posterior network were correlated with visual/spatial scores obtained from independent neuropsychological assessments, with fast learners performing better on visual/spatial subtests. No relationship was found between functional connectivity dynamics in the memory network and visual/spatial test scores indicative of cognitive skill. By using a comprehensive set of measures (behavioral, cognitive, and neurophysiological), we report that individual variations in learning-related performance change are supported by differences in cognitive ability and time-sensitive connectivity in functional neural networks. Hum Brain Mapp 37:3911-3928, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".