Fractal-Based Analysis of fMRI BOLD Signal During Naturalistic Viewing Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Temporal fractals are characterized by prominent scale-invariance and self-similarity across time scales. Monofractal analysis quantifies this scaling behavior in a single parameter, the Hurst exponent (H). Higher H reflects greater correlation in the signal structure, which is taken as being more fractal. Previous fMRI studies have observed lower H during conventional tasks relative to resting state conditions, and shown that H is negatively correlated with task difficulty and novelty. To date, no study has investigated the fractal dynamics of BOLD signal during naturalistic conditions. Methods: We performed fractal analysis on Human Connectome Project 7T fMRI data (n = 72, 41 females, mean age 29.46 ± 3.76 years) to compare H across movie-watching and rest. Results: In contrast to previous work using conventional tasks, we found higher H values for movie relative to rest (mean difference = 0.014; p = 5.279 × 10−7; 95% CI [0.009, 0.019]). H was significantly higher in movie than rest in the visual, somatomotor and dorsal attention networks, but was significantly lower during movie in the frontoparietal and default networks. We found no cross-condition differences in test-retest reliability of H. Finally, we found that H of movie-derived stimulus properties (e.g., luminance changes) were fractal whereas H of head motion estimates were non-fractal. Conclusions: Overall, our findings suggest that movie-watching induces fractal signal dynamics. In line with recent work characterizing connectivity-based brain state dynamics during movie-watching, we speculate that these fractal dynamics reflect the configuring and reconfiguring of brain states that occurs during naturalistic processing, and are markedly different than dynamics observed during conventional tasks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".