The efficacy and methodology of using near-infrared spectroscopy to determine resting-state brain networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional connectivity is a critical aspect of brain function and is essential for understanding, diagnosing, and treating neurological and psychiatric disorders. It refers to the synchronous activity between different regions of the brain, which gives rise to communication and information processing. Resting-state functional connectivity is a subarea of study that allows researchers to examine brain activity in the absence of a task or stimulus. This can provide insight into the brain's intrinsic functional architecture and help identify neural networks that are active during rest. Thus, determining functional connectivity topography is valuable both clinically and in research. Traditional methods using functional magnetic resonance imaging have proven to be effective, however, they have their limitations. In this review, we investigate the feasibility of using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) as a low-cost, portable alternative for measuring functional connectivity. We first establish fNIRS' ability to detect localized brain activity during task-based experiments. Next, we verify its use in resting-state studies with results showing a high degree of correspondence with resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI). Also discussed are various data-processing methods and the validity of filtering the global signal, which is the current standard for analysis. We consider the possible origins of the global signal, if it contains pertinent neuronal information that could be of importance in better understanding neuronal networks, and what we believe is the best method of approaching signal analysis and regression.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".