A method for independent component graph analysis of resting‐state <scp>fMRI</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Independent component analysis (ICA) has been extensively used for reducing task-free BOLD fMRI recordings into spatial maps and their associated time-courses. The spatially identified independent components can be considered as intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs) of non-contiguous regions. To date, the spatial patterns of the networks have been analyzed with techniques developed for volumetric data. OBJECTIVE: Here, we detail a graph building technique that allows these ICNs to be analyzed with graph theory. METHODS: First, ICA was performed at the single-subject level in 15 healthy volunteers using a 3T MRI scanner. The identification of nine networks was performed by a multiple-template matching procedure and a subsequent component classification based on the network "neuronal" properties. Second, for each of the identified networks, the nodes were defined as 1,015 anatomically parcellated regions. Third, between-node functional connectivity was established by building edge weights for each networks. Group-level graph analysis was finally performed for each network and compared to the classical network. RESULTS: Network graph comparison between the classically constructed network and the nine networks showed significant differences in the auditory and visual medial networks with regard to the average degree and the number of edges, while the visual lateral network showed a significant difference in the small-worldness. CONCLUSIONS: This novel approach permits us to take advantage of the well-recognized power of ICA in BOLD signal decomposition and, at the same time, to make use of well-established graph measures to evaluate connectivity differences. Moreover, by providing a graph for each separate network, it can offer the possibility to extract graph measures in a specific way for each network. This increased specificity could be relevant for studying pathological brain activity or altered states of consciousness as induced by anesthesia or sleep, where specific networks are known to be altered in different strength.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".