This review used a common bibliometric technique to identify areas of application of artificial intelligence (AI) in neuroscience research by analyzing citation patterns. Networks of related publications were constructed using bibliographic coupling, focusing on peer-reviewed research articles and review articles that included elements of both AI and neuroscience. The use of AI in neuroscience has experienced significant growth, with a doubling time of 4 to 5 years for AI-related neuroscience publications in the past decade. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and transformer-based large language models have been applied across an increasing range of neuroscience subdisciplines, with profound impact on cognitive, computational, systems, and clinical neuroscience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GrantMJ, BoothA. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J, 2009; 26(2):91–108.
2.
LeggS, HutterM. A collection of definitions of intelligence. Front Artif Intell Appl, 2007; 157:17–24.
3.
LenatD, FeigenbaumE. Oh the thresholds of knowledge. Artif Intell Crit Concepts, 2000; 2:298.
van EckNJ, WaltmanL. VOS: A new method for visualizing similarities between objects. In: Advances in Data Analysis Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Gesellschaft für Klassifikation. (DeckerR, LenzH-J. eds.) Springer: Berlin; 2007.
McAllisterJT, LennertzL, Atencio MojicaZ. Mapping a discipline: A guide to using VOSviewer for bibliometric and visual analysis. Science & Technology Libraries, 2022; 41(3):319–348; doi: 10.1080/0194262x.2021.1991547
8.
van EckNJ, WaltmanL. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 2010; 84(2):523–538; doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
9.
Van Eck NWL. VOSviewer Manual, Version 1.6.19. 2023.
10.
HassonU, NastaseSA, GoldsteinA. Direct fit to nature: An evolutionary perspective on biological and artificial neural networks. Neuron, 2020; 105(3):416–434; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2019.12.002
LindsayG. Models of The Mind: How Physics, Engineering and Mathematics Have Shaped Our Understanding of the Brain. Bloomsbury Publishing; 2021.
13.
MacphersonT, ChurchlandA, SejnowskiT, et al.Natural and artificial intelligence: A brief introduction to the interplay between AI and neuroscience research. Neural Netw, 2021; 144:603–613; doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2021.09.018
14.
RichardsB, TsaoD, ZadorA. The application of artificial intelligence to biology and neuroscience. Cell, 2022; 185(15):2640–2643; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.06.047
15.
UllmanS. Using neuroscience to develop artificial intelligence. Science, 2019; 363(6428):692–693.
16.
ZadorA, EscolaS, RichardsB, et al.Catalyzing next-generation artificial intelligence through NeuroAI. Nat Commun, 2023; 14(1):1597; doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-37180-x
17.
FangW, ChenY, DingJ, et al.SpikingJelly- An open-source machine learning infrastructure platform for spike-based intelligence. Sci Adv, 2023; 9(40):eadi1480.
18.
Turing AM. Computing Machinery and Intelligence. In: Passing the Turing Test Philosophical and Methodological Issues in the Quest for the Thinking Computer. (Epstein R, Roberts G, Beber G. eds.) Springer, 2009.
19.
BrownTB, Mann B, RyderN, et al. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners. 34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. (NeurIPS 2020), ,Vancouver, Canada.
20.
RichardsBA, LillicrapTP, BeaudoinP, et al.A deep learning framework for neuroscience. Nat Neurosci, 2019; 22(11):1761–1770; doi: 10.1038/s41593-019-0520-2
21.
HodgkinAL, HuxleyAF. A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J Physiol, 1952; 117(4):500–544.
22.
ByrneA, RossJ, NicksR, et al.Mean-field models for EEG/MEG: From oscillations to waves. Brain Topogr, 2022; 35(1):36–53; doi: 10.1007/s10548-021-00842-4
23.
CoorayGK, RoschRE, FristonKJ. Global dynamics of neural mass models. PLoS Comput Biol, 2023; 19(2):e1010915; doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010915.
24.
DurstewitzD, KoppeG, ThurmMI. Reconstructing computational system dynamics from neural data with recurrent neural networks. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2023; 24(11):693–710; doi: 10.1038/s41583-023-00740-7
25.
ChenY, ZhangH, CameronM, et al.Predictive sequence learning in the hippocampal formation. Neuron, 2024; 112(15):2645–2658.e4.
26.
KimR, SejnowskiTJ. Strong inhibitory signaling underlies stable temporal dynamics and working memory in spiking neural networks. Nat Neurosci, 2021; 24(1):129–139; doi: 10.1038/s41593-020-00753-w
27.
ChurchlandMM, CunninghamJP, KaufmanMT, et al.Neural population dynamics during reaching. Nature, 2012; 487(7405):51–56; doi: 10.1038/nature11129
28.
PandarinathC, O’SheaDJ, CollinsJ, et al.Inferring single-trial neural population dynamics using sequential auto-encoders. Nat Methods, 2018; 15(10):805–815; doi: 10.1038/s41592-018-0109-9
29.
ShenoyKV, KaoJC. Measurement, manipulation and modeling of brain-wide neural population dynamics. Nat Commun, 2021; 12(1):633; doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20371-1
30.
VyasS, GolubMD, SussilloD, et al.Computation through neural population dynamics. Annu Rev Neurosci, 2020; 43:249–275; doi: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-092619-094115
31.
DiCarloJJ, ZoccolanD, RustNC. How does the brain solve visual object recognition? Neuron, 2012; 73(3):415–434; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.01.010
YaminsDL, DiCarloJJ. Using goal-driven deep learning models to understand sensory cortex. Nat Neurosci, 2016; 19(3):356–365; doi: 10.1038/nn.4244
34.
YaminsDL, HongH, CadieuCF, et al.Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2014; 111(23):8619–8624; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1403112111
35.
AkbariH, KhalighinejadB, HerreroJL, et al.Towards reconstructing intelligible speech from the human auditory cortex. Sci Rep, 2019; 9(1):874; doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37359-z
36.
KellAJ, McDermottJH. Deep neural network models of sensory systems: Windows onto the role of task constraints. Curr Opin Neurobiol, 2019; 55:121–132; doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2019.02.003
37.
GoldsteinA, ZadaZ, BuchnikE, et al.Shared computational principles for language processing in humans and deep language models. Nat Neurosci, 2022; 25(3):369–380; doi: 10.1038/s41593-022-01026-4
38.
ShmueliG. To explain or to predict? Statist Sci, 2010; 25(3); doi: 10.1214/10-sts330
39.
SchrimpfM, KubiliusJ, LeeMJ, et al.Integrative benchmarking to advance neurally mechanistic models of human intelligence. Neuron, 2020; 108(3):413–423; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.07.040
40.
WindingM, PedigoBD, BarnesCL, et al.The connectome of an insect brain. Science, 2023; 379(6636):eadd9330; doi: 10.1126/science.add9330
41.
BaeJA, BaptisteM, BishopCA, et al.;MICrONS Consortium. 2023, Functional connectomics spanning multiple areas of mouse visual cortex. BioRxiv, p. 2021-07. doi:10.1101/2021.07.28.454025
42.
DorkenwaldS, MatsliahA, SterlingAR, et al.;FlyWire Consortium. Neuronal wiring diagram of an adult brain. Nature, 2024; 634(8032):124–138; doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07558-y
43.
SchlegelP, YinY, BatesAS, et al.;FlyWire Consortium. Whole-brain annotation and multi-connectome cell typing of Drosophila. Nature, 2024; 634(8032):139–152; doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07686-5
44.
TurnerNL, MacrinaT, BaeJA, et al.Reconstruction of neocortex: Organelles, compartments, cells, circuits, and activity. Cell, 2022; 185(6):1082–1100 e24; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.01.023
45.
Schneider-MizellCM, BodorAL, BrittainD, et al.;MICrONS Consortium. Cell-type-specific inhibitory circuitry from a connectomic census of mouse visual cortex. bioRxiv, 2024; doi: 10.1101/2023.01.23.525290
46.
DongY, RuanS, SuH, et al. ViewFool: Evaluating the Robustness of Visual Recognition to Adversarial Viewpoints.2023; doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2210.03895
47.
WichmannFA, GeirhosR. Are deep neural networks adequate behavioral models of human visual perception? Annu Rev Vis Sci, 2023; 9:501–524; doi: 10.1146/annurev-vision-120522-031739
48.
GeirhosR, NarayanappaK, MitzkusB, et al. Partial success in closing the gap between human and machine vision. Adv Neural Inform Proc Syst , 2021; 34:23885–23899.
49.
GeirhosR, TemmeCR, RauberJ, et al. Generalisation in Humans and Deep Neural Networks. Adv Neural Inform Proc Syst , 2018; 31:7538–7550.
50.
MarcelS, RodriguezY. Torchvision the machine-vision package of Torch. Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimedia , 2010:1485–1488.
51.
GershmanSJ, AssadJA, DattaSR, et al.Explaining dopamine through prediction errors and beyond. Nat Neurosci, 2024; 27(9):1645–1655; doi: 10.1038/s41593-024-01705-4
52.
DorkenwaldS, Schneider-Mizell CM, BrittainD., et al. CAVE: Connectome annotation versioning engine. bioRxiv, 2023; doi: 10.1101/2023.07.26.550598
53.
ZhengZ, LauritzenJS, PerlmanE, et al.A Complete Electron Microscopy Volume of the Brain of Adult Drosophila melanogaster. Cell, 2018; 174(3):730–743.e22; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.019
54.
RaiD, ZhouY, FengS, et al.2024. A practical review of mechanistic interpretability for transformer-based language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02646.
55.
CardNS, WairagkarM, IacobacciC, et al.An accurate and rapidly calibrating speech neuroprosthesis. N Engl J Med, 2024; 391(7):609–618; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2314132
56.
RauberJ, Brendel W, Bethge M. A Python toolbox to benchmark the robustness of machine learning models. 2017; doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1707.04131
57.
MetzgerSL, LittlejohnKT, SilvaAB, et al.A high-performance neuroprosthesis for speech decoding and avatar control. Nature, 2023; 620(7976):1037–1046; doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06443-4
58.
LiuY, ZhaoZ, XuM, et al.Decoding and synthesizing tonal language speech from brain activity. Sci Adv, 2023; 9(23):eadh0478.
EisensteinM. Putting the mouse brain on the map. Nature, 2024; 628(8008):677–679.
61.
AxerM, AmuntsK. Scale matters: The nested human connectome. Science, 2022; 378(6619):500–504.
62.
TangJ, YuanF, ShenX, et al.Bridging biological and artificial neural networks with emerging neuromorphic devices: Fundamentals, progress, and challenges. Adv Mater, 2019; 31(49):e1902761; doi: 10.1002/adma.201902761
63.
SchalkG, BrunnerP, AllisonBZ, et al.Translation of neurotechnologies. Nat Rev Bioeng, 2024; 2(8):637–652; doi: 10.1038/s44222-024-00185-2
64.
GomaaA, HuangY, HagagA, et al.Comprehensive multimodal deep learning survival prediction enabled by a transformer architecture: A multicenter study in glioblastoma. Neurooncol Adv, 2024; 6(1):vdae122; doi: 10.1093/noajnl/vdae122
65.
HofmannUG, StieglitzT. Why some BCI should still be called BMI. Nat Commun, 2024; 15(1):6207; doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-50603-7
66.
OkunMS, MarjeninT, EkanayakeJ, et al.Definition of implanted neurological device abandonment: A systematic review and consensus statement. JAMA Netw Open, 2024; 7(4):e248654; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.8654
67.
RommelfangerKS, JeongS-J, EmaA, et al.;Global Neuroethics Summit Delegates. Neuroethics Questions to Guide Ethical Research in the International Brain Initiatives. Neuron, 2018; 100(1):19–36; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2018.09.021
68.
GreelyHT, GradyC, RamosKM, et al.Neuroethics guiding principles for the NIH BRAIN initiative. J Neurosci, 2018; 38(50):10586–10588; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2077-18.2018
69.
LiG, LiL, LiY, et al.An MRI radiomics approach to predict survival and tumour-infiltrating macrophages in gliomas. Brain, 2022; 145(3):1151–1161; doi: 10.1093/brain/awab340
70.
BuchnerJA, KoflerF, MayingerM, et al.Radiomics-based prediction of local control in patients with brain metastases following postoperative stereotactic radiotherapy. Neuro Oncol, 2024; 26(9):1638–1650; doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noae098
71.
RenJ, ZhaiX, YinH, et al.Multimodality MRI radiomics based on machine learning for identifying true tumor recurrence and treatment-related effects in patients with postoperative glioma. Neurol Ther, 2023; 12(5):1729–1743; doi: 10.1007/s40120-023-00524-2
72.
LiZ, LiH, RalescuAL, et al.A novel collaborative self-supervised learning method for radiomic data. Neuroimage, 2023; 277:120229; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120229
73.
LeeJO, AhnSS, ChoiKS, et al.Added prognostic value of 3D deep learning-derived features from preoperative MRI for adult-type diffuse gliomas. Neuro Oncol, 2024; 26(3):571–580; doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noad202
74.
ZhongS, RenJX, YuZP, et al.Predicting glioblastoma molecular subtypes and prognosis with a multimodal model integrating convolutional neural network, radiomics, and semantics. J Neurosurg, 2023; 139(2):305–314; doi: 10.3171/2022.10.JNS22801
75.
RuffleJK, MohintaS, GrayR, et al.Brain tumour segmentation with incomplete imaging data. Brain Commun, 2023; 5(2):fcad118; doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcad118
76.
RezaeijoSM, ChegeniN, Baghaei NaeiniF, et al.Within-modality synthesis and novel radiomic evaluation of brain MRI scans. Cancers (Basel), 2023; 15(14); doi: 10.3390/cancers15143565
77.
LiX, StrasserB, NeubergerU, et al.Deep learning super-resolution magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of brain metabolism and mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase glioma. Neurooncol Adv, 2022; 4(1):vdac071; doi: 10.1093/noajnl/vdac071
78.
HerrgottGA, SnyderJM, SheR, et al.Detection of diagnostic and prognostic methylation-based signatures in liquid biopsy specimens from patients with meningiomas. Nat Commun, 2023; 14(1):5669; doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-41434-z
79.
ZhongY, ZhouL, XuJ, et al.Predicting prognosis outcomes of primary central nervous system lymphoma with high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapeutic treatment using lipidomics. Neurooncol Adv, 2024; 6(1):vdae119; doi: 10.1093/noajnl/vdae119
80.
SegalA, ParkesL, AquinoK, et al.Regional, circuit and network heterogeneity of brain abnormalities in psychiatric disorders. Nat Neurosci, 2023; 26(9):1613–1629; doi: 10.1038/s41593-023-01404-6
81.
WangY, LiuS, SpiteriAG, et al.Understanding machine learning applications in dementia research and clinical practice: A review for biomedical scientists and clinicians. Alzheimers Res Ther, 2024; 16(1):175; doi: 10.1186/s13195-024-01540-6
82.
Bernstein-EliavMT, TavorI. The prediction of brain activity from connectivity: Advances and applications. Neuroscientist, 2024; 30(3):367–377.
83.
FinnES, BandettiniPA. Movie-watching outperforms rest for functional connectivity-based prediction of behavior. Neuroimage, 2021; 235:117963; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.117963
84.
ShenX, FinnES, ScheinostD, et al.Using connectome-based predictive modeling to predict individual behavior from brain connectivity. Nat Protoc, 2017; 12(3):506–518; doi: 10.1038/nprot.2016.178
85.
YeungAWK, MoreS, WuJ, et al.Reporting details of neuroimaging studies on individual traits prediction: A literature survey. Neuroimage, 2022; 256:119275; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119275
86.
PoldrackRA. Handbook of Functional MRI Data Analysis. Cambridge University Press: 2024.
87.
ChenY, HeHAO, LinW, et al.The connectome‐based prediction of trust propensity in older adults: A resting‐state functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Human Brain Mapping, 2023; 44(11):4337–4351; doi: 10.1002/hbm.26385
88.
FinnES, ShenX, ScheinostD, et al.Functional connectome fingerprinting: Identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nat Neurosci, 2015; 18(11):1664–1671; doi: 10.1038/nn.4135
89.
DhamalaE, YeoBTT, HolmesAJ. One size does not fit all: Methodological considerations for brain-based predictive modeling in psychiatry. Biol Psychiatry, 2023; 93(8):717–728; doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2022.09.024
90.
BandettiniPA. fMRI. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA; 2020.
91.
FristonK. Computational psychiatry: From synapses to sentience. Mol Psychiatry, 2023; 28(1):256–268; doi: 10.1038/s41380-022-01743-z
92.
LanillosP, OlivaD, PhilippsenA, et al.A review on neural network models of schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. Neural Netw, 2020; 122:338–363; doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2019.10.014
93.
PikeAC, RobinsonOJ. Reinforcement learning in patients with mood and anxiety disorders vs control individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 2022; 79(4):313–322; doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.0051
94.
KamitaniY, TongF. Decoding the visual and subjective contents of the human brain. Nat Neurosci, 2005; 8(5):679–685; doi: 10.1038/nn1444
95.
HorikawaT, TamakiM, MiyawakiY, et al.Neural decoding of visual imagery during sleep. Science, 2013; 340(6132):639–642.
96.
GallantJL, PophamSF. Semantic representation in the human brain under rich, naturalistic conditions. In: The Cognitive Neurosciences. MIT Press: 2020.
97.
HuthAG, de HeerWA, GriffithsTL, et al.Natural speech reveals the semantic maps that tile human cerebral cortex. Nature, 2016; 532(7600):453–458; doi: 10.1038/nature17637
98.
PophamSF, HuthAG, BilenkoNY, et al.Visual and linguistic semantic representations are aligned at the border of human visual cortex. Nat Neurosci, 2021; 24(11):1628–1636; doi: 10.1038/s41593-021-00921-6
99.
YangL, ZhangZ, SongY, et al.Diffusion Models: A Comprehensive Survey of Methods and Applications. ACM Comput Surv, 2024; 56(4):1–39; doi: 10.1145/3626235
100.
ReberJ, HwangK, BowrenM, et al.Cognitive impairment after focal brain lesions is better predicted by damage to structural than functional network hubs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2021; 118(19); doi: 10.1073/pnas.2018784118
101.
YuY, KanX, CuiH, et al.Deep dag learning of effective brain connectivity for fMRI analysis. Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging, 2023; 2023; doi: 10.1109/isbi53787.2023.10230429
102.
CanarioE, ChenD, BiswalB. A review of resting-state fMRI and its use to examine psychiatric disorders. Psychoradiology, 2021; 1(1):42–53; doi: 10.1093/psyrad/kkab003
103.
HamiltonLS, HuthAG. The revolution will not be controlled: Natural stimuli in speech neuroscience. Lang Cogn Neurosci, 2020; 35(5):573–582; doi: 10.1080/23273798.2018.1499946
104.
NaselarisT, KayKN, NishimotoS, et al.Encoding and decoding in fMRI. Neuroimage, 2011; 56(2):400–410; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.07.073
105.
ZhaoW, MakowskiC, HaglerDJ, et al.Task fMRI paradigms may capture more behaviorally relevant information than resting-state functional connectivity. Neuroimage, 2023; 270:119946; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.119946
106.
TangJ, LeBelA, JainS, et al.Semantic reconstruction of continuous language from non-invasive brain recordings. Nat Neurosci, 2023; 26(5):858–866; doi: 10.1038/s41593-023-01304-9
107.
RaoA, BarkleyD, FrancaGS, et al.Exploring tissue architecture using spatial transcriptomics. Nature, 2021; 596(7871):211–220; doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03634-9
108.
ChenX, FischerS, RueMCP, et al.Whole-cortex in situ sequencing reveals input-dependent area identity. Nature, 2024; doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07221-6
109.
LeinE, BormLE, LinnarssonS. The promise of spatial transcriptomics for neuroscience in the era of molecular cell typing. Science, 2017; 358(6359):64–69.
110.
TianL, ChenF, MacoskoEZ. The expanding vistas of spatial transcriptomics. Nat Biotechnol, 2023; 41(6):773–782; doi: 10.1038/s41587-022-01448-2
111.
JumperJ, EvansR, PritzelA, et al.Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature, 2021; 596(7873):583–589; doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
