MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615056316 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177466

Exploring the role of white matter connectivity in cortex maturation

2017· article· en· W2615056316 on OpenAlexaff
Cecilia Friedrichs‐Maeder, Alessandra Griffa, Juliane Schneider, Petra S. Hüppi, Anita C. Truttmann, Patric Hagmann

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConnectomicsWhite matterNeuroscienceDiffusion MRIConnectomeBiologyCerebral cortexSensory systemBrain developmentFunctional connectivityPsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maturation of the cortical gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) are described as sequential processes following multiple, but distinct rules. However, neither the mechanisms driving brain maturation processes, nor the relationship between GM and WM maturation are well understood. Here we use connectomics and two MRI measures reflecting maturation related changes in cerebral microstructure, namely the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) and the T1 relaxation time (T1), to study brain development. We report that the advancement of GM and WM maturation are inter-related and depend on the underlying brain connectivity architecture. Particularly, GM regions and their incident WM connections show corresponding maturation levels, which is also observed for GM regions connected through a WM tract. Based on these observations, we propose a simple computational model supporting a key role for the connectome in propagating maturation signals sequentially from external stimuli, through primary sensory structures to higher order functional cortices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207