MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Age-related differences in the structural complexity of subcortical and ventricular structures

2016· article· en· W2541689425 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christopher R. Madan, Elizabeth A. Kensinger

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurobiology of Aging · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthBoston CollegeNational Institute of Mental HealthMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsGyrificationThalamusBrain sizeStructural complexityNeuroscienceBiologyMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingCerebral cortexRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been well established that the volume of several subcortical structures decreases in relation to age. Different metrics of cortical structure (e.g., volume, thickness, surface area, and gyrification) have been shown to index distinct characteristics of interindividual differences; thus, it is important to consider the relation of age to multiple structural measures. Here, we compare age-related differences in subcortical and ventricular volume to those differences revealed with a measure of structural complexity, quantified as fractal dimensionality. Across 3 large data sets, totaling nearly 900 individuals across the adult lifespan (aged 18-94 years), we found greater age-related differences in complexity than volume for the subcortical structures, particularly in the caudate and thalamus. The structural complexity of ventricular structures was not more strongly related to age than volume. These results demonstrate that considering shape-related characteristics improves sensitivity to detect age-related differences in subcortical structures.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurobiology of AgingSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207