Impacts of spaceflight experience on human brain structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spaceflight induces widespread changes in human brain morphology. It is unclear if these brain changes differ with varying mission duration or spaceflight experience history (i.e., novice or experienced, number of prior missions, time between missions). Here we addressed this issue by quantifying regional voxelwise changes in brain gray matter volume, white matter microstructure, extracellular free water (FW) distribution, and ventricular volume from pre- to post-flight in a sample of 30 astronauts. We found that longer missions were associated with greater expansion of the right lateral and third ventricles, with the majority of expansion occurring during the first 6 months in space then appearing to taper off for longer missions. Longer inter-mission intervals were associated with greater expansion of the ventricles following flight; crew with less than 3 years of time to recover between successive flights showed little to no enlargement of the lateral and third ventricles. These findings demonstrate that ventricle expansion continues with spaceflight with increasing mission duration, and inter-mission intervals less than 3 years may not allow sufficient time for the ventricles to fully recover their compensatory capacity. These findings illustrate some potential plateaus in and boundaries of human brain changes with spaceflight.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".