Attention Performance Measured by Attention Network Test Is Correlated with Global and Regional Efficiency of Structural Brain Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional neuroimaging studies have indicated the involvement of separate brain areas in three distinct attention systems: alerting, orienting, and executive control (EC). However, the structural correlates underlying attention remains unexplored. Here, we utilized graph theory to examine the neuroanatomical substrates of the three attention systems measured by attention network test (ANT) in 65 healthy subjects. White matter connectivity, assessed with diffusion tensor imaging deterministic tractography was modeled as a structural network comprising 90 nodes defined by the automated anatomical labeling (AAL) template. Linear regression analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between topological parameters and the three attentional effects. We found a significant positive correlation between EC function and global efficiency of the whole brain network. At the regional level, node-specific correlations were discovered between regional efficiency and all three ANT components, including dorsolateral superior frontal gyrus, thalamus and parahippocampal gyrus for EC, thalamus and inferior parietal gyrus for alerting, and paracentral lobule and inferior occipital gyrus for orienting. Our findings highlight the fundamental architecture of interregional structural connectivity involved in attention and could provide new insights into the anatomical basis underlying human behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 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".