Adaptive network interactions in cognition after stimulation-induced inferior parietal lobe inhibition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The inferior parietal lobe (IPL) is an important hub of neural network function across multiple cognitive states, contributing to “task-negative” networks (default mode network; DMN) and “task-active” networks. To investigate flexible network behavior in cognition, we combined spaced double continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in both task and rest states. Thirty healthy, young volunteers participated in three measurements, in which posterior IPL was targeted using either right, left, or sham cTBS, prior to a three-task fMRI experiment encompassing the key cognitive domains attention, semantics, and social cognition. Additionally, all participants completed three pre-post stimulation resting-state fMRI sessions. Independent component analysis was applied to pre-stimulation resting-state data to identify intrinsic connectivity networks. The detected networks guided back-projection to post-stimulation task data for each subject and session. Using correlational psychophysiological interaction analysis, network interactions were characterized across cognitive domains and stimulation conditions. ANOVAs and post-hoc t-tests within each domain showed that cTBS most effectively influenced network interaction in order of decreasing task complexity, starting from social cognition, followed by semantics and attention. During social cognition, compared to sham, right-hemisphere stimulation increased right fronto-parietal control (rFPCN) and somatomotor network interaction (p=0.0139), as well as ventral and dorsal attention network interaction (p=0.045). Left-side stimulation increased ventral attention-to-somatomotor network connectivity (p=0.017) and decreased dorsal attention and DMN subnetwork connectivity (p = 0.016). Right-side stimulation increased interaction between posterior DMN and rFPCN during the semantic task (p=0.012), and between the somatomotor network and a DMN subnetwork during the attention task (p=0.059). Collectively, our results demonstrate that, rather than inducing local changes, cTBS influences large-scale network interactions in a task-specific manner. The observed patterns suggest that more complex cognitive tasks show increased responsiveness to stimulation, with more distributed changes across networks and distinct, hemisphere-specific patterns between task-positive and task-negative network interactions. Research Category and Technology and Methods Basic Research: 18. Functional Brain Imaging Keywords: network connectivity, cTBS, plasticity, default mode network
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".