MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404334434 · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00425

The control costs of human brain dynamics

2024· article· en· W4404334434 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric G. Ceballos, Andrea I. Luppi, Gabriel Castrillón, Manish Saggar, Bratislav Mišić, Valentin Riedl

Bibliographic record

VenueNetwork Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilElitenetzwerk BayernEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMolson Foundation
KeywordsControl (management)Human brainComputer scienceResting state fMRIDimension (graph theory)NeurosciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human brain is a complex system with high metabolic demands and extensive connectivity that requires control to balance energy consumption and functional efficiency over time. How this control is manifested on a whole-brain scale is largely unexplored, particularly what the associated costs are. Using the network control theory, here, we introduce a novel concept, time-averaged control energy (TCE), to quantify the cost of controlling human brain dynamics at rest, as measured from functional and diffusion MRI. Importantly, TCE spatially correlates with oxygen metabolism measures from the positron emission tomography, providing insight into the bioenergetic footing of resting-state control. Examining the temporal dimension of control costs, we find that brain state transitions along a hierarchical axis from sensory to association areas are more efficient in terms of control costs and more frequent within hierarchical groups than between. This inverse correlation between temporal control costs and state visits suggests a mechanism for maintaining functional diversity while minimizing energy expenditure. By unpacking the temporal dimension of control costs, we contribute to the neuroscientific understanding of how the brain governs its functionality while managing energy expenses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetwork NeuroscienceSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207