On the Origin of Individual Functional Connectivity Variability: The Role of White Matter Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fingerprint patterns derived from functional connectivity (FC) can be used to identify subjects across groups and sessions, indicating that the topology of the brain substantially differs between individuals. However, the source of FC variability inferred from resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging remains unclear. One possibility is that these variations are related to individual differences in white matter structural connectivity (SC). However, directly comparing FC with SC is challenging given the many potential biases associated with quantifying their respective strengths. In an attempt to circumvent this, we employed a recently proposed test-retest approach that better quantifies inter-subject variability by first correcting for intra-subject nuisance variability (i.e., head motion, physiological differences in brain state, etc.) that can artificially influence FC and SC measures. Therefore, rather than directly comparing the strength of FC with SC, we asked whether brain regions with, for example, low inter-subject FC variability also exhibited low SC variability. From this, we report two main findings: First, at the whole-brain level, SC variability was significantly lower than FC variability, indicating that an individual's structural connectome is far more similar to another relative to their functional counterpart even after correcting for noise. Second, although FC and SC variability were mutually low in some brain areas (e.g., primary somatosensory cortex) and high in others (e.g., memory and language areas), the two were not significantly correlated across all cortical and sub-cortical regions. Taken together, these results indicate that even after correcting for factors that may differently affect FC and SC, the two, nonetheless, remain largely independent of one another. Further work is needed to understand the role that direct anatomical pathways play in supporting vascular-based measures of FC and to what extent these measures are dictated by anatomical connectivity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".