Investigating the Impact of Local Manipulations on Spontaneous and Evoked Brain Complexity Indices: A Large-Scale Computational Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain complexity relies on the integrity of structural and functional brain networks, where specialized areas synergistically cooperate on a large scale. Local alterations within these areas can lead to widespread consequences, leading to a reduction in overall network complexity. Investigating the mechanisms governing this occurrence and exploring potential compensatory interventions is a pressing research focus. In this study, we employed a whole-brain in silico model to simulate the large-scale impact of local node alterations. These were assessed by network complexity metrics derived from both the model’s spontaneous activity (i.e., Lempel–Ziv complexity (LZc)) and its responses to simulated local perturbations (i.e., the Perturbational Complexity Index (PCI)). Compared to LZc, local node silencing of distinct brain regions induced large-scale alterations that were paralleled by a systematic drop of PCI. Specifically, while the intact model engaged in complex interactions closely resembling those obtained in empirical studies, it displayed reduced PCI values across all local manipulations. This approach also revealed the heterogeneous impact of different local manipulations on network alterations, emphasizing the importance of posterior hubs in sustaining brain complexity. This work marks an initial stride toward a comprehensive exploration of the mechanisms underlying the loss and recovery of brain complexity across different conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".