Differences in the expression of cortex-wide neural dynamics are related to behavioral phenotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavior differs across individuals, ranging from typical to atypical phenotypes. 1 Understanding how differences in behavior relate to differences in neural activity is critical for developing treatments of neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. One hypothesis is that differences in behavior reflect individual differences in the dynamics of how information flows through the brain. In support of this, the correlation of neural activity between brain areas, termed "functional connectivity," varies across individuals 2 and is disrupted in autism, 3 schizophrenia, 4 and depression. 5 However, the changes in neural activity that underlie altered behavior and functional connectivity remain unclear. Here, we show that individual differences in the expression of different patterns of cortical neural dynamics explain variability in both functional connectivity and behavior. Using mesoscale imaging, we recorded neural activity across the dorsal cortex of behaviorally "typical" and "atypical" mice. All mice shared the same recurring cortex-wide spatiotemporal motifs of neural activity, and these motifs explained the large majority of variance in cortical activity (>75%). However, individuals differed in how frequently different motifs were expressed. These differences in motif expression explained differences in functional connectivity and behavior across both typical and atypical mice. Our results suggest that differences in behavior and functional connectivity are due to changes in the processes that select which pattern of neural activity is expressed at each moment in time.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".