MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313281277 · doi:10.1002/hbm.26187

Scale‐free dynamics of core‐periphery topography

2022· article· en· W4313281277 on OpenAlexaff
Philipp Klar, Yasir Çatal, Robert Langner, Zirui Huang, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCore (optical fiber)Resting state fMRIDynamics (music)Scale (ratio)Task (project management)Noise (video)NeurosciencePsychologyPhysicsCartographyComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceOpticsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human brain's cerebral cortex exhibits a topographic division into higher-order transmodal core and lower-order unimodal periphery regions. While timescales between the core and periphery region diverge, features of their power spectra, especially scale-free dynamics during resting-state and their mdulation in task states, remain unclear. To answer this question, we investigated the ~1/f-like pink noise manifestation of scale-free dynamics in the core-periphery topography during rest and task states applying infra-slow inter-trial intervals up to 1 min falling inside the BOLD's infra-slow frequency band. The results demonstrate (1) higher resting-state power-law exponent (PLE) in the core compared to the periphery region; (2) significant PLE increases in task across the core and periphery regions; and (3) task-related PLE increases likely followed the task's atypically low event rates, namely the task's periodicity (inter-trial interval = 52-60 s; 0.016-0.019 Hz). A computational model and a replication dataset that used similar infra-slow inter-trial intervals provide further support for our main findings. Altogether, the results show that scale-free dynamics differentiate core and periphery regions in the resting-state and mediate task-related effects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207