Deep learning identifies morphological determinants of sex differences in the pre-adolescent brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of data-driven deep learning to identify sex differences in developing brain structures of pre-adolescents has heretofore not been accomplished. Here, the approach identifies sex differences by analyzing the minimally processed MRIs of the first 8144 participants (age 9 and 10 years) recruited by the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. The identified pattern accounted for confounding factors (i.e., head size, age, puberty development, socioeconomic status) and comprised cerebellar (corpus medullare, lobules III, IV/V, and VI) and subcortical (pallidum, amygdala, hippocampus, parahippocampus, insula, putamen) structures. While these have been individually linked to expressing sex differences, a novel discovery was that their grouping accurately predicted the sex in individual pre-adolescents. Another novelty was relating differences specific to the cerebellum to pubertal development. Finally, we found that reducing the pattern to a single score not only accurately predicted sex but also correlated with cognitive behavior linked to working memory. The predictive power of this score and the constellation of identified brain structures provide evidence for sex differences in pre-adolescent neurodevelopment and may augment understanding of sex-specific vulnerability or resilience to psychiatric disorders and presage sex-linked learning disabilities.
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 | 0.001 | 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".