Unraveling reproducible dynamic states of individual brain functional parcellation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data-driven parcellations are widely used for exploring the functional organization of the brain, and also for reducing the high dimensionality of fMRI data. Despite the flurry of methods proposed in the literature, functional brain parcellations are not highly reproducible at the level of individual subjects, even with very long acquisitions. Some brain areas are also more difficult to parcellate than others, with association heteromodal cortices being the most challenging. An important limitation of classical parcellations is that they are static, that is, they neglect dynamic reconfigurations of brain networks. In this paper, we proposed a new method to identify dynamic states of parcellations, which we hypothesized would improve reproducibility over static parcellation approaches. For a series of seed voxels in the brain, we applied a cluster analysis to regroup short (3 min) time windows into "states" with highly similar seed parcels. We split individual time series of the Midnight scan club sample into two independent sets of 2.5 hr (test and retest). We found that average within-state parcellations, called stability maps, were highly reproducible (over 0.9 test-retest spatial correlation in many instances) and subject specific (fingerprinting accuracy over 70% on average) between test and retest. Consistent with our hypothesis, seeds in heteromodal cortices (posterior and anterior cingulate) showed a richer repertoire of states than unimodal (visual) cortex. Taken together, our results indicate that static functional parcellations are incorrectly averaging well-defined and distinct dynamic states of brain parcellations. This work calls to revisit previous methods based on static parcellations, which includes the majority of published network analyses of fMRI data. Our method may, thus, impact how researchers model the rich interactions between brain networks in health and disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".