Relationships between Human Brain Structural Connectomes and Traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Advanced brain imaging techniques make it possible to measure individuals’ structural connectomes in large cohort studies non-invasively. However, due to limitations in image resolution and pre-processing, questions remain about whether reconstructed connectomes are measured accurately enough to detect relationships with human traits and behaviors. Using a state-of-the-art structural connectome processing pipeline and a novel dimensionality reduction technique applied to data from the Human Connectome Project (HCP), we show strong relationships between connectome structure and various human traits. Our dimensionality reduction approach uses a tensor characterization of the connectomes and relies on a generalization of principal components analysis. We analyze over 1100 scans for 1076 subjects from the HCP and the Sherbrooke test-retest data set as well as 175 human traits that measure domains including cognition, substance use, motor, sensory and emotion. We find that brain connectomes are associated with many traits. Specifically, fluid intelligence, language comprehension, and motor skills are associated with increased cortical-cortical brain connectivity, while the use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana are associated with decreased cortical-cortical 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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".