BrainSpace: a toolbox for the analysis of macroscale gradients in neuroimaging and connectomics datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding how higher order cognitive function emerges from the underlying brain structure depends on quantifying how the behaviour of discrete regions are integrated within the broader cortical landscape. Recent work has established that this macroscale brain organization and function can be quantified in a compact manner through the use of multivariate machine learning approaches that identify manifolds often described as cortical gradients. By quantifying topographic principles of macroscale organization, cortical gradients lend an analytical framework to study structural and functional brain organization across species, throughout development and aging, and its perturbations in disease. More generally, its macroscale perspective on brain organization offers novel possibilities to investigate the complex relationships between brain structure, function, and cognition in a quantified manner. Here, we present a compact workflow and open-access toolbox that allows for (i) the identification of gradients (from structural or functional imaging data), (ii) their alignment (across subjects or modalities), and (iii) their visualization (in embedding or cortical space). Our toolbox also allows for controlled association studies between gradients with other brain-level features, adjusted with respect to several null models that account for spatial autocorrelation. The toolbox is implemented in both Python and Matlab, programming languages widely used by the neuroimaging and network neuroscience communities. Several use-case examples and validation experiments demonstrate the usage and consistency of our tools for the analysis of functional and microstructural gradients across different spatial scales.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.019 |
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".