Activity‐State Entropy: A novel brain entropy measure based on spatial patterns of activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain entropy is a measure of the complexity of brain activity that has been linked to various cognitive abilities. The measure is based on Shannon Entropy, a measure from Information Theory that quantifies the information capacity of a system from the probability distribution of its states. Most fMRI studies measure brain entropy at the voxel level as time-series entropy and assume that entropic time-series indicate complex large-scale spatiotemporal patterns of activity. NEW METHOD: We developed a novel measure of brain entropy called Activity-State Entropy. The method quantifies entropy based on underlying patterns of coactivation identified using Principal Components Analysis. These patterns, termed eigenactivity states, combine in time-varying proportions. RESULTS: We showed that Activity-State Entropy is sensitive to the complexity of the spatiotemporal patterns of activity in simulated fMRI data. We then applied this measure to real resting-state fMRI data and found that the eigenactivity states that explained the most variance in the data were comprised of large clusters of coactivating voxels, including clusters within Default Mode Network regions. More entropic brains were increasingly influenced by eigenactivity states comprised of smaller and more sparsely distributed clusters. COMPARISON TO EXISTING METHODS: We compared Activity-State Entropy to Sample Entropy and Dispersion Entropy, two time-series entropy measures commonly used in neuroimaging research, and found all three measures were positively correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Activity-State Entropy provides a measure of the spatiotemporal complexity of brain activity that complements time-series based measures of brain entropy.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".