Functional connectivity predicts gender: Evidence for gender differences in resting brain connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prevalence of certain forms of psychopathology, such as autism and depression, differs between genders and understanding gender differences of the neurotypical brain may provide insights into risk and protective factors. In recent research, resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rfMRI) is widely used to map the inherent functional networks of the brain. Although previous studies have reported gender differences in rfMRI, the robustness of gender differences is not well characterized. In this study, we use a large data set to test whether rfMRI functional connectivity (FC) can be used to predict gender and identify FC features that are most predictive of gender. We utilized rfMRI data from 820 healthy controls from the Human Connectome Project. By applying a predefined functional template and partial least squares regression modeling, we achieved a gender prediction accuracy of 87% when multi-run rfMRI was used. Permutation tests confirmed that gender prediction was reliable ( p<.001). Effects of motion, age, handedness, blood pressure, weight, and brain volume on gender prediction are discussed. Further, we found that FC features within the default mode (DMN), fronto-parietal and sensorimotor networks contributed most to gender prediction. In the DMN, right fusiform gyrus and right ventromedial prefrontal cortex were important contributors. The above regions have been previously implicated in aspects of social functioning and this suggests potential gender differences in social cognition mediated by the DMN. Our findings demonstrate that gender can be reliably predicted using rfMRI data and highlight the importance of controlling for gender in brain imaging studies.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".