MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3093823228 · doi:10.1101/2020.10.19.344101

Dynamic task-linked switching between brain networks - A Tri-Network perspective

2020· preprint· en· W3093823228 on OpenAlexafffund
Saurabh Bhaskar Shaw, Margaret C. McKinnon, Jennifer J. Heisz, Suzanna Becker

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHomewood Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityVector Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsDefault mode networkTask switchingSalience (neuroscience)CognitionTask (project management)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceNetwork dynamicsNeuroscienceWorking memoryPerspective (graphical)Dynamic network analysisCognitive psychologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer networkBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The highly influential tri-network model proposed by Menon integrates 3 key intrinsic brain networks — the central executive network (CEN), salience network (SN), and the default mode network (DMN), into a single cohesive model underlying normal behaviour and cognition. A large body of evidence suggests that abnormal intra- and inter- network connectivity between these three networks underlies the various behavioural and cognitive dysfunctions observed in patients with neuropsychiatric conditions such as PTSD and depression. An important prediction of the tri-network model is that the DMN and CEN networks are anti-correlated under the control of the SN, such that if a task engages one of the two, the SN inhibits the activation of the other. To date most of the evidence surrounding the functions of these three core networks comes from either resting state analyses or in the context of a single task with respect to rest. Few studies have investigated multiple tasks simultaneously or characterized the dynamics of task switching. Hence, a careful investigation of the temporal dynamics of network activity during task switching is warranted. To accomplish this we collected fMRI data from 14 participants that dynamically switched between a 2-back working memory task and an autobiographical memory retrieval task, designed to activate the CEN, DMN and the SN. The fMRI data were used to 1. identify nodes and sub-networks within the three major networks involved in task-linked dynamic network switching, 2. characterize the temporal pattern of activation of these nodes and sub-networks, and finally 3. investigate the causal influence that these nodes and sub-networks exerted on each other. Using a combination of multivariate neuroimaging analyses, timecourse analyses and multivariate Granger causality measures to study the tri-network dynamics, the current study found that the SN co-activates with the task-relevant network, providing a mechanistic insight into SN-mediated network selection in the context of explicit tasks. Our findings also indicate active involvement of the posterior insula and some medial temporal nodes in task-linked functions of the SN and DMN, warranting their inclusion as network nodes in future studies of the tri-network model. These results add to the growing body of evidence showing the complex interplay of CEN, DMN and SN nodes and sub-networks required for adequate task-switching, and characterizes a normative pattern of task-linked network dynamics within the context of Menon’s tri-network model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→