Lifespan Trajectories of Asymmetry in White Matter Tracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asymmetry in white matter is believed to give rise to the brain's capacity for specialized processing and is involved in the lateralization of various cognitive processes, such as language and visuo-spatial reasoning. Although studies of white matter asymmetry have been previously documented, they have often been constrained by limited age ranges, sample sizes, or the scope of the tracts and structural features examined. While normative lifespan charts for brain structures are emerging, comprehensive charts detailing white matter asymmetries across numerous pathways and diverse structural measures have been notably absent. This study addresses this gap by leveraging a large-scale dataset of 26,199 typically developing and aging individuals, ranging from 0 to 100 years of age, from 42 primary neuroimaging studies. We generated comprehensive lifespan trajectories for 30 lateralized association and projection white matter tracts, examining 14 distinct microstructural and macrostructural features of these pathways. Our findings reveal that: (1) asymmetries are widespread across the brain's white matter and are present in all 30 pathways; (2) for a given pathway, the degree and direction of asymmetry differ between features of tissue microstructure and pathway macrostructure; (3) asymmetries vary across and within pathway types (association and projection tracts); and (4) these asymmetries are not static, following unique trajectories across the lifespan, with distinct changes during development, and a general trend of becoming more asymmetric with increasing age (particularly in later adulthood) across pathways. This study represents the most extensive characterization of white matter asymmetry across the lifespan to date, charting how lateralization patterns emerge, mature, and change throughout life. It provides a foundational resource for understanding the principles of white matter organization from early to late life, its relation to functional specialization and inter-individual variability, and offers a key reference for interpreting deviations during healthy development and aging as well as those associated with clinical populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".