Dynamic GSCA generalized structured component analysis: a structural equation model for analyzing effective connectivity in functional neuroimaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural equation modeling (SEM) is often used to investigate effective connectivity in functional neuroimaging studies. Modeling effective connectivity refers to an approach in which a number of specific brain regions, called regions of interest (ROIs), are selected according to some prior knowledge about the regions, and directional (causal) relationships between them are hypothesized and tested. Existing methods for SEM, however, have serious limitations in terms of their computational capacity and the range of models that can be specified. To alleviate these difficulties, I propose a new method of SEM for analysis of effective connectivity, called Dynamic GSCA (Generalized Structured Component Analysis). This method is a component-based method that combines the original GSCA and a multivariate autoregressive model to account for the dynamic nature of data taken over time. Dynamic GSCA can accommodate more elaborate structural models that describe relationships among ROIs and is less prone to computational difficulties, such as improper solutions and the lack of model identification, than the conventional methods of SEM. To illustrate the use of the proposed method, results of empirical studies based on synthetic and real data are reported. Further extensions of Dynamic GSCA are also discussed, including higher order components, multi-sample comparison, multilevel analysis, and latent interactions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".