Identifying canonical and replicable multi‐scale intrinsic connectivity networks in 100k+ <scp>resting‐state fMRI</scp> datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the known benefits of data-driven approaches, the lack of approaches for identifying functional neuroimaging patterns that capture both individual variations and inter-subject correspondence limits the clinical utility of rsfMRI and its application to single-subject analyses. Here, using rsfMRI data from over 100k individuals across private and public datasets, we identify replicable multi-spatial-scale canonical intrinsic connectivity network (ICN) templates via the use of multi-model-order independent component analysis (ICA). We also study the feasibility of estimating subject-specific ICNs via spatially constrained ICA. The results show that the subject-level ICN estimations vary as a function of the ICN itself, the data length, and the spatial resolution. In general, large-scale ICNs require less data to achieve specific levels of (within- and between-subject) spatial similarity with their templates. Importantly, increasing data length can reduce an ICN's subject-level specificity, suggesting longer scans may not always be desirable. We also find a positive linear relationship between data length and spatial smoothness (possibly due to averaging over intrinsic dynamics), suggesting studies examining optimized data length should consider spatial smoothness. Finally, consistency in spatial similarity between ICNs estimated using the full data and subsets across different data lengths suggests lower within-subject spatial similarity in shorter data is not wholly defined by lower reliability in ICN estimates, but may be an indication of meaningful brain dynamics which average out as data length increases.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".