Network component analysis reveals developmental trajectories of structural connectivity and specific alterations in autism spectrum disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structural organisation of the brain can be characterised as a hierarchical ensemble of segregated modules linked by densely interconnected hub regions that facilitate distributed functional interactions. Disturbances to this network may be an important marker of abnormal development. Recently, several neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have been framed as disorders of connectivity but the full nature and timing of these disturbances remain unclear. In this study, we use non-negative matrix factorisation, a data-driven, multivariate approach, to model the structural network architecture of the brain as a set of superposed subnetworks, or network components. In an openly available dataset of 196 subjects scanned between 5 to 85 years we identify a set of robust and reliable subnetworks that develop in tandem with age and reflect both anatomically local and long-range, network hub connections. In a second experiment, we compare network components in a cohort of 51 high-functioning ASD adolescents to a group of age-matched controls. We identify a specific subnetwork representing an increase in local connection strength in the cingulate cortex in ASD (t=3.44, p<0.001). This work highlights possible long-term implications of alterations to the developmental trajectories of specific cortical subnetworks.
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) | 0.001 | 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".