Biology subjects

Fiebach, C.

Publications and source records attributed to Fiebach, C..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2022

How much data do we need? Lower bounds of brain activation states to predict human cognitive ability

Human functional brain connectivity can be temporally decomposed into states of high and low cofluctuation, defined as coactivation of brain regions over time. Rare states of particularly high cofluctuation have been shown to reflect fundamentals of intrinsic functional network architecture and to be highly subject-specific. However, it is unclear whether such network-defining states also contribute to individual variations in cognitive abilities - which strongly rely on the interactions among distributed brain regions. By introducing CMEP, a new eigenvector-based prediction framework, we show that as few as 16 temporally separated time frames (< 1.5% of 10min resting-state fMRI) can significantly predict individual differences in intelligence (N = 263, p < .001). Against previous expectations, individuals network-defining time frames of particularly high cofluctuation do not predict intelligence. Multiple functional brain networks contribute to the prediction, and all results replicate in an independent sample (N = 831). Our results suggest that although fundamentals of person-specific functional connectomes can be derived from few time frames of highest connectivity, temporally distributed information is necessary to extract information about cognitive abilities. This information is not restricted to specific connectivity states, like network-defining high-cofluctuation states, but rather reflected across the entire length of the brain connectivity time series.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2021

Probing the association between resting state brain network dynamics and psychological resilience

This study aimed at replicating a previously reported negative correlation between node flexibility and psychological resilience, i.e., the ability to retain mental health in the face of stress and adversity. To this end, we used multiband resting-state BOLD fMRI (TR = .675 sec) from 52 participants who had filled out three psychological questionnaires assessing resilience. Time-resolved functional connectivity was calculated by performing a sliding window approach on averaged time series parcellated according to different established atlases. Multilayer modularity detection was performed to track network reconfigurations over time and node flexibility was calculated as the number of times a node changes community assignment. In addition, node promiscuity (the fraction of communities a node participates in) and node degree (as proxy for time-varying connectivity) were calculated to extend previous work. We found no substantial correlations between resilience and node flexibility. We observed a small number of correlations between the two other brain measures and resilience scores, that were however very inconsistently distributed across brain measures, differences in temporal sampling, and parcellation schemes. This heterogeneity calls into question the existence of previously postulated associations between resilience and brain network flexibility and highlights how results may be influenced by specific analysis choices. Author SummaryWe tested the replicability and generalizability of a previously proposed negative association between dynamic brain network reconfigurations derived from multilayer modularity detection (node flexibility) and psychological resilience. Using multiband resting-state BOLD fMRI data and exploring several parcellation schemes, sliding window approaches, and temporal resolutions of the data, we could not replicate previously reported findings regarding the association between node flexibility and resilience. By extending this work to other measures of brain dynamics (node promiscuity, degree) we observe a rather inconsistent pattern of correlations with resilience, that strongly varies across analysis choices. We conclude that further research is needed to understand the network neuroscience basis of mental health and discuss several reasons that may account for the variability in results.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2018

Finding the P3 in the P600: Decoding shared neural mechanisms of responses to syntactic violations and oddball target detection

The P600 Event-Related Brain Potential, elicited by syntactic violations in sentences, is generally interpreted as indicating language-specific structural/combinatorial processing, with far-reaching implications for models of language. P600 effects are also often taken as evidence for language-like grammars in non-linguistic domains like music or arithmetic. An alternative account, however, interprets the P600 as a P3, a domain-general brain response to salience. Using time-generalized multivariate pattern analysis, we demonstrate that P3 EEG patterns, elicited in a visual Oddball experiment, account for the P600 effect elicited in a syntactic violation experiment: P3 pattern-trained MVPA can classify P600 trials just as well as P600-trained ones. A second study replicates and generalizes this finding, and demonstrates its specificity by comparing it to face- and semantic mismatch-associated EEG responses. These results indicate that P3 and P600 share neural patterns to a substantial degree, calling into question the interpretation of P600 as a language-specific brain response and instead strengthening its association with the P3. More generally, our data indicate that observing P600-like brain responses provides no direct evidence for the presence of language-like grammars, in language or elsewhere.

neuroscience↗