Microvascular structure variability explains variance in fMRI functional connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of regional brain vasculature on resting-state fMRI BOLD signals is well documented. However, the role of brain vasculature is often overlooked in functional connectivity research. In the present report, utilizing publicly available whole-brain vasculature data in the mouse, we investigate the relationship between functional connectivity and brain vasculature. This is done by assessing interregional variations in vasculature through a novel metric termed vascular similarity. First, we identify features to describe the regional vasculature. Then, we employ multiple linear regression models to predict functional connectivity, incorporating vascular similarity alongside metrics from structural connectivity and spatial topology. Our findings reveal a significant correlation between functional connectivity strength and regional vasculature similarity, especially in anesthetized mice. We also show that multiple linear regression models of functional connectivity using standard predictors are improved by including vascular similarity. We perform this analysis at the cerebrum and whole-brain levels using data from both male and female mice. Our findings regarding the relation between functional connectivity and the underlying vascular anatomy may enhance our understanding of functional connectivity based on fMRI and provide insights into its disruption in neurological disorders.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".