Moving beyond the mean: Subgroups and dimensions of brain activity and cognitive performance across domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human neuroimaging during cognitive tasks has provided unique and important insights into the neurobiology of cognition. However, the vast majority of research relies on group aggregate or average statistical maps of activity, which do not fully capture the rich intersubject variability in brain function. In order to fully understand the neurobiology of cognitive processes, it is necessary to explore the range of variability in activation patterns across individuals. To better characterize individual variability, hierarchical clustering was performed separately on six fMRI tasks in 822 participants from the Human Connectome Project. Across all tasks, clusters ranged from a predominantly 'deactivating' pattern towards a more 'activating' pattern of brain activity, with significant differences in out-of-scanner cognitive test scores between clusters. Cluster stability was assessed via a resampling approach; a cluster probability matrix was generated, as the probability of any pair of participants clustering together when both were present in a random subsample. Rather than forming distinct clusters, participants fell along a spectrum or into pseudo-clusters without clear boundaries. A principal components analysis of the cluster probability matrix revealed three components explaining over 90% of the variance in clustering. Plotting participants in this lower-dimensional 'similarity space' revealed manifolds of variations along an S 'snake' shaped spectrum or a folded circle or 'tortilla' shape. The 'snake' shape was present in tasks where individual variability related to activity along covarying networks, while the 'tortilla' shape represented multiple networks which varied independently.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".