MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409990005 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.28.650949

Changing cognitive chimera states in human brain networks with age: Variations in cognitive integration and segregation

2025· preprint· en· W4409990005 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Patton

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsCognitionChimera (genetics)Cognitive agingCognitive sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The aging process profoundly impacts the human brain, leading to notable changes in cognitive abilities. Although the brain’s structural and functional alterations with age are individually well documented, how differences in cognitive abilities emerge from variations in the underlying spatio-temporal patterns of regional brain activity is largely unknown. Patterns of increased synchronization between brain regions are taken as enhanced cognitive integration, while decreased synchronization is indicative of cognitive segregation. The ability to dynamically switch between different levels of integration and segregation across different cognitive systems is believed to be crucial for overall cognitive performance. Building on a recently proposed cognitively informed, synchronization-based framework, we study here age-related variations in dynamical flexibility between segregation and integration, as captured by changes in the variable patterns of partial synchronization or chimera states. Leveraging personalized brain network models based on large-scale, multisite datasets of cross-sectional healthy cohorts, we systematically show how regional brain stimulation produces distinct patterns of synchronization. We find that chimera states play a crucial role in regulating the balance between cognitive integration and segregation as the brain ages, providing new insights into the mechanisms underlying cognitive decline and preservation in aging. Whereas the emergent synchronization behavior of brain regions belonging to the same cognitive system often show the same aging trends, different cognitive systems can demonstrate distinct trends. This supports the idea that aging affects cognitive systems differently and that understanding this variability is essential for a more comprehensive view of neuro-cognitive aging. At the same time, dynamical flexibility increases in the oldest age groups across most cognitive systems. This may reflect compensatory mechanisms to counteract age-related cognitive declines and points towards a phenomenon of dedifferentiation. Yet, the multiplicity of behaviors highlights that whereas dedifferentiation emerges in certain cognitive systems, differentiation can also occur in others. This illustrates that these processes, though seemingly oppositional, can coexist and unfold in parallel across different cognitive systems. Author summary The healthy brain relies on a dynamic balance between two complementary processes—integration and segregation. Integration enables coordination between distributed brain regions, while segregation reflects specialization. Optimal cognitive function emerges from a highly flexible balance between these processes as implicated by greater cognitive performance. As we age, changes in cognitive abilities occur, especially at older age, while at the same time the brain reorganizes. The exact relationship between the two is largely unknown and our work aims to tackle this challenge. Using a data-informed computational model we examine age-related differences in dynamical flexibility between segregation and integration, as captured by changes in the variable patterns of partial synchronization called chimera states—patterns where some brain regions cooperate while others remain largely independent. Our research shows that chimera states are key to maintaining the brain’s balance between integration and segregation as we age. This balance shifts differently in brain systems responsible for distinct cognitive skills, which may provide new insights into the mechanisms underlying cognitive decline and preservation in aging. In particular, it supports the idea that aging affects brain systems differently and that understanding this variability is essential for a more comprehensive view of neuro-cognitive aging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207