The ENIGMA Toolbox: Cross-disorder integration and multiscale neural contextualization of multisite neuroimaging datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among ‘big data’ initiatives, the ENIGMA ( E nhancing N euroImaging G enetics through M eta- A nalysis) Consortium—a worldwide alliance of over 2,000 scientists diversified into over 50 Working Groups—has yielded some of the largest studies of the healthy and diseased brain. Integration of multisite datasets to assess transdiagnostic similarities and differences and to contextualize findings with respect to neural organization, however, have been limited. Here, we introduce the ENIGMA Toolbox, a Python/Matlab ecosystem for ( i ) accessing 100+ ENIGMA datasets, facilitating cross-disorder analysis, ( ii ) visualizing data on brain surfaces, and ( iii ) contextualizing findings at the microscale ( postmortem cytoarchitecture and gene expression) and macroscale (structural and functional connectomes). Our Toolbox equips scientists with tutorials to explore molecular, histological, and network correlates of noninvasive neuroimaging markers of brain disorders. Moreover, our Toolbox bridges the gap between standardized data processing protocols and analytic workflows and facilitates cross-consortia initiatives. The Toolbox is documented and openly available at http://enigma-toolbox.readthedocs.io . Abstract Figure
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".