Predicting Real‐Life Cognitive Scores From Functional Connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, functional connectivity patterns, derived from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have been widely used to predict various cognitive traits. However, most studies have focused on measures assessed under controlled laboratory conditions, which may not fully reflect the complexity of the traits in real-world environments. In this study, we investigated connectome-based predictions of cognitive performance in ecologically valid, real-world settings. Participants (n = 194) performed the Psychometric Entrance Test, a standardized exam used for admission to higher education institutions in Israel and a strong predictor of undergraduate academic success. Using functional connectivity patterns, we significantly predicted overall test performance, as well as its three cognitive-specific domains: quantitative reasoning, verbal reasoning, and proficiency in a foreign language. Significant predictions were consistent across four different prediction approaches, demonstrating the robustness of the relations between functional connectivity and cognition. Additionally, we examined which connectivity features mostly contributed to predictions, analyzing both edge- and node-level contributions. We found that different cognitive abilities (i.e., quantitative skills vs. language-related skills) were primarily predicted by unique connectivity patterns. Yet, predictive features were more similar for scores that were more strongly correlated at the behavioral level. Last, we implemented a transfer learning approach in which the predicted cognitive-specific scores were used as features for prediction of the global score, resulting in an improved prediction compared to that derived directly from functional connectivity. Overall, our results demonstrate that the functional connectome captures real-world variability in both global and domain-specific cognitive abilities, emphasizing its potential to serve as an objective marker of real-world cognitive performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".