Spatially heterogeneous structure-function coupling in haemodynamic and electromagnetic brain networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between structural and functional connectivity in the brain is a key question in connectomics. Here we quantify patterns of structure-function coupling across the neocortex, by comparing structural connectivity estimated using diffusion MRI with functional connectivity estimated using both neurophysiological (MEG-based) and haemodynamic (fMRI-based) recordings. We find that structure-function coupling is heterogeneous across brain regions and frequency bands. The link between structural and functional connectivity is generally stronger in multiple MEG frequency bands compared to resting state fMRI. Structure-function coupling is greater in slower and intermediate frequency bands compared to faster frequency bands. We also find that structure-function coupling systematically follows the archetypal sensorimotor-association hierarchy, as well as patterns of laminar differentiation, peaking in granular layer IV. Finally, structure-function coupling is better explained using structure-informed inter-regional communication metrics than using structural connectivity alone. Collectively, these results place neurophysiological and haemodynamic structure-function relationships in a common frame of reference and provide a starting point for a multi-modal understanding of structure-function coupling in the brain.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".