Identification of Negative BOLD Responses in Epilepsy Using Windkessel Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alongside positive blood oxygenation level–dependent (BOLD) responses associated with interictal epileptic discharges, a variety of negative BOLD responses (NBRs) are typically found in epileptic patients. Previous studies suggest that, in general, up to four mechanisms might underlie the genesis of NBRs in the brain: (i) neuronal disruption of network activity, (ii) altered balance of neurometabolic/vascular couplings, (iii) arterial blood stealing, and (iv) enhanced cortical inhibition. Detecting and classifying these mechanisms from BOLD signals are pivotal for the improvement of the specificity of the electroencephalography–functional magnetic resonance imaging (EEG-fMRI) image modality to identify the seizure-onset zones in refractory local epilepsy. This requires models with physiological interpretation that furnish the understanding of how these mechanisms are fingerprinted by their BOLD responses. Here, we used a Windkessel model with viscoelastic compliance/inductance in combination with dynamic models of both neuronal population activity and tissue/blood O 2 to classify the hemodynamic response functions (HRFs) linked to the above mechanisms in the irritative zones of epileptic patients. First, we evaluated the most relevant imprints on the BOLD response caused by variations of key model parameters. Second, we demonstrated that a general linear model is enough to accurately represent the four different types of NBRs. Third, we tested the ability of a machine learning classifier, built from a simulated ensemble of HRFs, to predict the mechanism underlying the BOLD signal from irritative zones. Cross-validation indicates that these four mechanisms can be classified from realistic fMRI BOLD signals. To demonstrate proof of concept, we applied our methodology to EEG-fMRI data from five epileptic patients undergoing neurosurgery, suggesting the presence of some of these mechanisms. We concluded that a proper identification and interpretation of NBR mechanisms in epilepsy can be performed by combining general linear models and biophysically inspired models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".