Generative AI for brain image computing and brain network computing: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed a significant advancement in brain imaging techniques that offer a non-invasive approach to mapping the structure and function of the brain. Concurrently, generative artificial intelligence (AI) has experienced substantial growth, involving using existing data to create new content with a similar underlying pattern to real-world data. The integration of these two domains, generative AI in neuroimaging, presents a promising avenue for exploring various fields of brain imaging and brain network computing, particularly in the areas of extracting spatiotemporal brain features and reconstructing the topological connectivity of brain networks. Therefore, this study reviewed the advanced models, tasks, challenges, and prospects of brain imaging and brain network computing techniques and intends to provide a comprehensive picture of current generative AI techniques in brain imaging. This review is focused on novel methodological approaches and applications of related new methods. It discussed fundamental theories and algorithms of four classic generative models and provided a systematic survey and categorization of tasks, including co-registration, super-resolution, enhancement, classification, segmentation, cross-modality, brain network analysis, and brain decoding. This paper also highlighted the challenges and future directions of the latest work with the expectation that future research can be beneficial.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".