Connectome-wide structure-function coupling models implicate polysynaptic alterations in autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental diagnoses. Although incompletely understood, structural and functional network alterations are increasingly recognized to be at the core of the condition. We utilized multimodal imaging and connectivity modeling to study structure-function coupling in ASD and probed mono- and polysynaptic mechanisms on structurally-governed network function. We examined multimodal magnetic resonance imaging data in 80 ASD and 61 neurotypical controls from the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE) II initiative. We predicted intrinsic functional connectivity from structural connectivity data in each participant using a Riemannian optimization procedure that varies the times that simulated signals can unfold along tractography-derived personalized connectomes. In both ASD and neurotypical controls, we observed improved structure-function prediction at longer diffusion time scales, indicating better modeling of brain function when polysynaptic mechanisms are accounted for. Prediction accuracy differences (∆prediction accuracy) were marked in transmodal association systems, such as the default mode network, in both neurotypical controls and ASD. Differences were, however, lower in ASD in a polysynaptic regime at higher simulated diffusion times. We compared regional differences in ∆prediction accuracy between both groups to assess the impact of polysynaptic communication on structure-function coupling. This analysis revealed that between-group differences in ∆prediction accuracy followed a sensory-to-transmodal cortical hierarchy, with an increased gap between controls and ASD in transmodal compared to sensory/motor systems. Multivariate associative techniques revealed that structure-function differences reflected inter-individual differences in autistic symptoms and verbal as well as non-verbal intelligence. Our network modeling approach sheds light on atypical structure-function coupling in autism, and suggests that polysynaptic network mechanisms are implicated in the condition and that these can help explain its wide range of associated symptoms.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".