Structural and Physiological Modeling (SAPM) for the Analysis of Functional MRI Data Applied to a Study of Human Nociceptive Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel method has been developed for analyzing connectivity between regions based on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. This method, termed structural and physiological modeling (SAPM), combines information about blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) responses, anatomy, and physiology to model coordinated signaling across networks of regions, including input and output signaling from each region and whether signaling is predominantly inhibitory or excitatory. The present study builds on a prior proof-of-concept demonstration of the SAPM method by providing evidence for the choice of network model and anatomical sub-regions, demonstrating the reproducibility of the results and identifying statistical thresholds needed to infer significance. The method is further validated by applying it to investigate human nociceptive processing in the brainstem and spinal cord and comparing the results to the known neuroanatomy, including anatomical regions and inhibitory and excitatory signaling. The results of this analysis demonstrate that it is possible to obtain reliable information about input and output signaling from anatomical regions and to identify whether this signaling has predominantly inhibitory or excitatory effects. SAPM provides much more detailed information about neuroanatomy than was previously possible based on fMRI data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".