Neuro-Informatics seminars

We will discuss a recent paper by Taylor et al. (2023): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811923002896. They discuss the merits of highlighting results instead of hiding them; that is, clearly marking which voxels and clusters pass a given significance threshold, but still highlighting sub-threshold results, with opacity proportional to the strength of the effect. They use this to illustrate how there in fact may be more agreement between researchers than previously thought, using the NARPS dataset as an example. By adopting a continuous, "highlighted" approach, it becomes clear that the majority of effects are in the same location and that the effect size is in the same direction, compared to an approach that only permits rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. We will also talk about the implications of this approach for creating figures, detecting artifacts, and aiding reproducibility.

Neuroscientists have many questions about connectomes that revolve around the ability to compare networks. For example, comparing connectomes could help explain how neural wiring is related to individual differences, genetics, disease, development, or learning. One such question is that of bilateral symmetry: are the left and right sides of a connectome the same? Here, we investigate the bilateral symmetry of a recently presented connectome of an insect brain, the Drosophila larva. We approach this question from the perspective of two-sample testing for networks. First, we show how this question of “sameness” can be framed as a variety of different statistical hypotheses, each with different assumptions. Then, we describe test procedures for each of these hypotheses. We show how these different test procedures perform on both the observed connectome as well as a suite of synthetic perturbations to the connectome. We also point out that these tests require careful attention to parameter alignment and differences in network density in order to provide biologically meaningful results. Taken together, these results provide the first statistical characterization of bilateral symmetry for an entire brain at the single-neuron level, while also giving practical recommendations for future comparisons of connectome networks.

The Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation (GIMME) framework has emerged as a promising method for characterizing connections between brain regions in functional neuroimaging data. Two of the most appealing features of this framework are its ability to estimate the directionality of connections between network nodes and its ability to determine whether those connections apply to everyone in a sample (group-level) or just to one person (individual-level). However, there are outstanding questions about the validity and stability of these estimates, including: 1) how recovery of connection directionality is affected by features of data sets such as scan length and autoregressive effects, which may be strong in some imaging modalities (resting state fMRI, fNIRS) but weaker in others (task fMRI); and 2) whether inferences about directionality at the group and individual levels are stable across time. This talk will provide an overview of the GIMME framework and describe relevant results from a large-scale simulation study that assesses directionality recovery under various conditions and a separate project that investigates the temporal stability of GIMME’s inferences in the Human Connectome Project data set. Analyses from these projects demonstrate that estimates of directionality are most precise when autoregressive and cross-lagged relations in the data are relatively strong, and that inferences about the directionality of group-level connections, specifically, appear to be stable across time. Implications of these findings for the interpretation of directional connectivity estimates in different types of neuroimaging data will be discussed.