A machine learning‐derived neuroanatomical pattern predicts delayed reward discounting in the Human Connectome Project Young Adult sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Delayed reward discounting (DRD) is defined as the extent to which person favors smaller rewards that are immediately available over larger rewards available in the future. Higher levels of DRD have been identified in individuals with a wide range of clinical disorders. Although there have been studies adopting larger samples and using only gray matter volume to characterize the neuroanatomical correlates of DRD, it is still unclear whether previously identified relationships are generalizable (out‐of‐sample) and how cortical thickness and cortical surface area contribute to DRD. In this study, using the Human Connectome Project Young Adult dataset ( N = 1038 ), a machine learning cross‐validated elastic net regression approach was used to characterize the neuroanatomical pattern of structural magnetic resonance imaging variables associated with DRD. The results revealed a multi‐region neuroanatomical pattern predicted DRD and this was robust in a held‐out test set (morphometry‐only R 2 = 3.34%, morphometry + demographics R 2 = 6.96%). The neuroanatomical pattern included regions implicated in the default mode network, executive control network, and salience network. The relationship of these regions with DRD was further supported by univariate linear mixed effects modeling results, in which many of the regions identified as part of this pattern showed significant univariate associations with DRD. Taken together, these findings provide evidence that a machine learning‐derived neuroanatomical pattern encompassing various theoretically relevant brain networks produces robustly predicts DRD in a large sample of healthy young adults.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".