MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416684922 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.25.690561

A default-control network cortical gradient differentiates the imagination of social and solitary experiences

2025· preprint· W4416684922 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew J. Anderson, Adam Turnbull, Jonathan Smallwood, Feng Lin

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMind wandering and attention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefault mode networkCognitionFunctional magnetic resonance imagingCognitive neuroscienceMode (computer interface)Control (management)Social cognitionAssociation (psychology)Cognitive systems

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding the neural basis of spontaneous thought - when attention shifts from external tasks to internally generated content such as reminiscing or planning - remains a central challenge in cognitive neuroscience. Progress in this area has lagged studies of externally driven cognition, in part because self-generated thought is difficult to control and measure. Recent work suggests that transitions between externally and internally focused cognitive states follow a continuous neural activation gradient that reflects opposing patterns of engagement of the frontoparietal control network versus the default mode network. To characterize internally focused cognitive states that prospectively engage the default mode network, we used functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to measure brain activity while participants imagined a range of personal scenarios prompted by generic text cues (e.g., party, housework) to mimic natural thought. Before scanning, participants described each scenario verbally and rated its experiential feature content. Gradient-space analysis revealed a cognitive transition within imagined states: solitary activities (e.g., housework) preferentially recruited the frontoparietal network relative to the default mode network, whereas social activities (e.g., a party) showed the opposite pattern. Because all cognitive states were internally focused (imagined) and elicited via the same non-interactive task, these results refine interpretations of the frontoparietal-default mode gradient. They show that this gradient does not simply differentiate external task-positive from internal task-negative states but also tracks semantic differences between internal cognitive states.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMind wandering and attentionFrench-language works237,207