Brain network topology predicts participant adherence to mental training programs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adherence determines the success and benefits of mental training (e.g., meditation) programs. It is unclear why some participants engage more actively in programs for mental training than others. Understanding neurobiological factors that predict adherence is necessary for understanding elements of learning and to inform better designs for new learning regimens. Clustering patterns in brain networks have been suggested to predict learning performance, but it is unclear whether these patterns contribute to motivational aspects of learning such as adherence. This study tests whether configurations of brain connections in resting-state fMRI scans can be used to predict adherence to two programs: meditation and creative writing. Results indicate that greater system segregation and clustering predict the number of practice sessions and class participation in both programs at a wide range of network thresholds (corrected p value < 0.05). At a local level, regions in subcortical circuitry such as striatum and accumbens predicted adherence in all subjects. Furthermore, there were also some important distinctions between groups: Adherence to meditation was predicted by connectivity within local network of the anterior insula and default mode network; and in the writing program, adherence was predicted by network neighborhood of frontal and temporal regions. Four machine learning methods were applied to test the robustness of the brain metric for classifying individual capacity for adherence and yielded reasonable accuracy. Overall, these findings underscore the fact that adherence and the ability to perform prescribed exercises is associated with organizational patterns of brain 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it