MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282026623 · doi:10.1002/hbm.25966

Interacting brains revisited: A cross‐brain network neuroscience perspective

2022· article· en· W4282026623 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Gerloff, Kerstin Konrad, Danilo Bzdok, Christina Büsing, Vanessa Reindl

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersRWTH Aachen UniversityDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)ENCODESocial neuroscienceBipartite graphSystems neuroscienceComputational neuroscienceNeuroscienceComputer sciencePsychologyCognitive scienceBayesian probabilityRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligenceGraphMachine learningSocial cognitionTheoretical computer scienceBiologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elucidating the neural basis of social behavior is a long-standing challenge in neuroscience. Such endeavors are driven by attempts to extend the isolated perspective on the human brain by considering interacting persons' brain activities, but a theoretical and computational framework for this purpose is still in its infancy. Here, we posit a comprehensive framework based on bipartite graphs for interbrain networks and address whether they provide meaningful insights into the neural underpinnings of social interactions. First, we show that the nodal density of such graphs exhibits nonrandom properties. While the current hyperscanning analyses mostly rely on global metrics, we encode the regions' roles via matrix decomposition to obtain an interpretable network representation yielding both global and local insights. With Bayesian modeling, we reveal how synchrony patterns seeded in specific brain regions contribute to global effects. Beyond inferential inquiries, we demonstrate that graph representations can be used to predict individual social characteristics, outperforming functional connectivity estimators for this purpose. In the future, this may provide a means of characterizing individual variations in social behavior or identifying biomarkers for social interaction and disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207