How do tasks impact the reliability of <scp>fMRI</scp> functional connectivity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there is growing interest in the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging-functional connectivity (fMRI-FC) for biomarker research, low measurement reliability of conventional acquisitions may limit applications. Factors known to impact FC reliability include scan length, head motion, signal properties, such as temporal signal-to-noise ratio (tSNR), and the acquisition state or task. As tasks impact signal in a region-wise fashion, they likely impact FC reliability differently across the brain, making task an important decision in study design. Here, we use the densely sampled Midnight Scan Club (MSC) dataset, comprising 5 h of rest and 6 h of task fMRI data in 10 healthy adults, to investigate regional effects of tasks on FC reliability. We further considered how BOLD signal properties contributing to tSNR, that is, temporal mean signal (tMean) and temporal standard deviation (tSD), vary across the brain, associate with FC reliability, and are modulated by tasks. We found that, relative to rest, tasks enhanced FC reliability and increased tSD for specific task-engaged regions. However, FC signal variability and reliability is broadly dampened during tasks outside task-engaged regions. From our analyses, we observed signal variability was the strongest driver of FC reliability. Overall, our findings suggest that the choice of task can have an important impact on reliability and should be considered in relation to maximizing reliability in networks of interest as part of study design.
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 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".