MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407995693 · doi:10.7554/elife.104996.1

Intrinsic dynamic shapes responses to external stimulation in the human brain

2025· preprint· en· W4407995693 on OpenAlexaff
Maximilian Nentwich, Marcin Leszczyński, Charles E. Schroeder, Stephan Bickel, Lucas C. Parra

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulationNeuroscienceBrain stimulationHuman brainPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Sensory stimulation of the brain reverberates in its recurrent neuronal networks. However, current computational models of brain activity do not separate immediate sensory responses from intrinsic recurrent dynamics. We apply a vector-autoregressive model with external input (VARX), combining the concepts of “functional connectivity” and “encoding models”, to intracranial recordings in humans. We find that the recurrent connectivity during rest is largely unaltered during movie watching. The intrinsic recurrent dynamic enhances and prolongs the neural responses to scene cuts, eye movements, and sounds. Failing to account for these exogenous inputs, leads to spurious connections in the intrinsic “connectivity”. The model shows that an external stimulus can reduce intrinsic noise. It also shows that sensory areas have mostly outward, whereas higher-order brain areas mostly incoming connections. We conclude that the response to an external audiovisual stimulus can largely be attributed to the intrinsic dynamic of the brain, already observed during rest.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLife→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→