Modeling the dynamics of cerebrovascular reactivity to carbon dioxide in fMRI under task and resting-state conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventionally, cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) is estimated as the amplitude of the hemodynamic response to vascular stimuli, most commonly carbon dioxide (CO2). While the CVR amplitude has established clinical utility, the temporal characteristics of CVR (dCVR) have been increasingly explored and may yield even more pathology-sensitive parameters. This work is motivated by the current need to evaluate the feasibility of dCVR modeling in various experimental conditions. In this work, we present a comparison of several recently published/utilized model-based deconvolution (response estimation) approaches for estimating the CO2 response function h(t), including maximum a posteriori likelihood (MAP), inverse logit (IL), canonical correlation analysis (CCA), and basis expansion (using Gamma and Laguerre basis sets). To aid the comparison, we devised a novel simulation framework that incorporates a wide range of SNRs, ranging from 10 to -7 dB, representative of both task and resting-state CO2 changes. In addition, we built ground-truth h(t) into our simulation framework, overcoming the conventional limitation that the true h(t) is unknown. Moreover, to best represent realistic noise found in fMRI scans, we extracted noise from in-vivo resting-state scans. Furthermore, we introduce a simple optimization of the CCA method (CCAopt) and compare its performance to these existing methods. Our findings suggest that model-based methods can accurately estimate dCVR even amidst high noise (i.e. resting-state), and in a manner that is largely independent of the underlying model assumptions for each method. We also provide a quantitative basis for making methodological choices, based on the desired dCVR parameters, the estimation accuracy and computation time. The BEL method provided the highest accuracy and robustness, followed by the CCAopt and IL methods. Of the three, the CCAopt method has the lowest computational requirements. These findings lay the foundation for wider adoption of dCVR estimation in CVR mapping.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".