Resting-State Activity in High-Order Visual Areas as a Window into Natural Human Brain Activations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major limitation of conventional human brain research has been its basis in highly artificial laboratory experiments. Due to technical constraints, little is known about the nature of cortical activations during ecological real life. We have previously proposed the "spontaneous trait reactivation (STR)" hypothesis arguing that resting-state patterns, which emerge spontaneously in the absence of external stimulus, reflect the statistics of habitual cortical activations during real life. Therefore, these patterns can serve as a window into daily life cortical activity. A straightforward prediction of this hypothesis is that spontaneous patterns should preferentially correlate to patterns generated by naturalistic stimuli compared with artificial ones. Here we targeted high-level category-selective visual areas and tested this prediction by comparing BOLD functional connectivity patterns formed during rest to patterns formed in response to naturalistic stimuli, as well as to more artificial category-selective, dynamic stimuli. Our results revealed a significant correlation between the resting-state patterns and functional connectivity patterns generated by naturalistic stimuli. Furthermore, the correlations to naturalistic stimuli were significantly higher than those found between resting-state patterns and those generated by artificial control stimuli. These findings provide evidence of a stringent link between spontaneous patterns and the activation patterns during natural vision.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".