MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408544493 · doi:10.7554/elife.101780.2.sa0

Author response: A General Framework for Characterizing Optimal Communication in Brain Networks

2025· peer-review· en· W4408544493 on OpenAlexaff
Kayson Fakhar, Fatemeh Hadaeghi, Caio Seguin, Shrey Dixit, Arnaud Messé, Gorka Zamora‐López, Bratislav Misic, Claus C. Hilgetag

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitive sciencePsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication in brain networks is the foundation of cognitive function and behavior. A multitude of evolutionary pressures, including the minimization of metabolic costs while maximizing communication efficiency, contribute to shaping the structure and dynamics of these networks. However, how communication efficiency is characterized depends on the assumed model of communication dynamics. Traditional models include shortest path signaling, random walker navigation, broadcasting, and diffusive processes. Yet, a general and model-agnostic framework for characterizing optimal neural communication remains to be established.Our study addresses this challenge by assigning communication efficiency through game theory, based on a combination of structural data from human cortical networks with computational models of brain dynamics. We quantified the exact influence exerted by each brain node over every other node using an exhaustive multi-site virtual lesioning scheme, creating optimal influence maps for various models of brain dynamics. These descriptions show how communication patterns unfold in the given brain network if regions maximize their influence over one another. By comparing these influence maps with a large variety of brain communication models, we found that optimal communication most closely resembles a broadcasting model in which regions leverage multiple parallel channels for information dissemination. Moreover, we show that the most influential regions within the cortex are formed by its rich-club. These regions exploit their topological vantage point by broadcasting across numerous pathways, thereby significantly enhancing their effective reach even when the anatomical connections are weak.Our work provides a rigorous and versatile framework for characterizing optimal communication across brain networks and reveals the most influential brain regions and the topological features underlying their optimal communication.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.006

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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