MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111678667 · doi:10.7554/elife.62116

Topographic gradients of intrinsic dynamics across neocortex

2020· article· en· W3111678667 on OpenAlexafffund
Golia Shafiei, Ross D. Markello, Reinder Vos de Wael, Boris C. Bernhardt, Ben Fulcher, Bratislav Mišić

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsNeocortexBiologyDynamics (music)Evolutionary biologyNeurosciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intrinsic dynamics of neuronal populations are shaped by both microscale attributes and macroscale connectome architecture. Here we comprehensively characterize the rich temporal patterns of neural activity throughout the human brain. Applying massive temporal feature extraction to regional haemodynamic activity, we systematically estimate over 6000 statistical properties of individual brain regions’ time-series across the neocortex. We identify two robust spatial gradients of intrinsic dynamics, one spanning a ventromedial-dorsolateral axis and dominated by measures of signal autocorrelation, and the other spanning a unimodal-transmodal axis and dominated by measures of dynamic range. These gradients reflect spatial patterns of gene expression, intracortical myelin and cortical thickness, as well as structural and functional network embedding. Importantly, these gradients are correlated with patterns of meta-analytic functional activation, differentiating cognitive versus affective processing and sensory versus higher-order cognitive processing. Altogether, these findings demonstrate a link between microscale and macroscale architecture, intrinsic dynamics, and cognition.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations182
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLifeSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207