Brain signal variability and executive functions across the life span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural variability is thought to facilitate survival through flexible adaptation to changing environmental demands. In humans, such capacity for flexible adaptation may manifest as fluid reasoning, inhibition of automatic responses, and mental set-switching-skills falling under the broad domain of executive functions that fluctuate over the life span. Neural variability can be quantified via the BOLD signal in resting-state fMRI. Variability of large-scale brain networks is posited to underpin complex cognitive activities requiring interactions between multiple brain regions. Few studies have examined the extent to which network-level brain signal variability across the life span maps onto high-level processes under the umbrella of executive functions. The present study leveraged a large publicly available neuroimaging dataset to investigate the relationship between signal variability and executive functions across the life span. Associations between brain signal variability and executive functions shifted as a function of age. Limbic-specific variability was consistently associated with greater performance across subcomponents of executive functions. Associations between executive function subcomponents and network-level variability of the default mode and central executive networks, as well as whole-brain variability, varied across the life span. Findings suggest that brain signal variability may help to explain to age-related differences in executive functions across the life span.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".