Joint embedding: A scalable alignment to compare individuals in a connectivity space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A common coordinate space enabling comparison across individuals is vital to understanding human brain organization and individual differences. By leveraging dimensionality reduction algorithms, high-dimensional fMRI data can be represented in a low-dimensional space to characterize individual features. Such a representative space encodes the functional architecture of individuals and enables the observation of functional changes across time. However, determining comparable functional features across individuals in resting-state fMRI in a way that simultaneously preserves individual-specific connectivity structure can be challenging. In this work we propose scalable joint embedding to simultaneously embed multiple individual brain connectomes within a common space that allows individual representations across datasets to be aligned. Using Human Connectome Project data, we evaluated the joint embedding approach by comparing it to the previously established orthonormal alignment model. Alignment using joint embedding substantially increased the similarity of functional representations across individuals while simultaneously capturing their distinct profiles, allowing individuals to be more discriminable from each other. Additionally, we demonstrated that the common space established using resting-state fMRI provides a better overlap of task-activation across participants. Finally, in a more challenging scenario - alignment across a lifespan cohort aged from 6 to 85 - joint embedding provided a better prediction of age (r2 = 0.65) than the prior alignment model. It facilitated the characterization of functional trajectories across lifespan. Overall, these analyses establish that joint embedding can simultaneously capture individual neural representations in a common connectivity space aligning functional data across participants and populations and preserve individual specificity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".