MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416225425 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.13.688224

cuBNM: GPU-Accelerated Brain Network Modeling

2025· preprint· en· W4416225425 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Saberi, Bin Wan, Kevin J. Wischnewski, Kyesam Jung, Leonard Sasse, Felix Hoffstaedter, Boris C. Bernhardt, Simon B. Eickhoff, Oleksandr V. Popovych, Sofie L. Valk

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityArtificial neural networkPython (programming language)GraphicsHuman Connectome ProjectGraphics processing unitComputer graphicsMassively parallelComputation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain network modeling uses computer simulations to infer about latent neural properties at micro- and mesoscales by fitting brain dynamic models to empirical data of individual subjects or groups. However, computational costs of (individualized) model fitting is a major bottleneck, limiting the practical feasibility of this approach to larger cohorts and more complex models, and highlighting the need for scalable simulation implementations. Here, we introduce cuBNM, a Python package which leverages parallel processing of graphics processing units to massively accelerate simulations of brain network models. We show running simulations on graphics processing units is several hundred times faster compared to central processing units. We demonstrate the usage of cuBNM by running optimization of group-level and individualized low- and high-dimensional models. As examples of the utility of individualized models, we investigated test-retest reliability and heritability of simulated and empirical measures in the Human Connectome Project dataset. We found simulated features were fairly reliable and significantly heritable, suggesting their biological plausibility. Overall, cuBNM enables large-scale simulations of brain network models, opening new avenues for studying latent neural processes across diverse populations, dense networks, and high-dimensional models, which was previously impractical due to computational constraints.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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 venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→