The brain’s complex functionality emerges from network interactions that go beyond dyadic connections, with higher-order interactions significantly contributing to this complexity. Homotopic functional connectivity (HoFC) is a key neurophysiological characteristic of the human brain, reflecting synchronized activity between corresponding regions in the brain’s hemispheres.
Materials and Methods:
Using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data from the Human Connectome Project, we evaluate dyadic and higher-order interactions of three functional connectivity (FC) parameterizations—bivariate correlation, partial correlation, and tangent space embedding—in their effectiveness at capturing HoFC through the inter-hemispheric analogy test.
Results:
Higher-order feature vectors are generated through node2vec, a random walk-based node embedding technique applied to FC networks. Our results show that higher-order feature vectors derived from partial correlation most effectively represent HoFC, while tangent space embedding performs best for dyadic interactions.
Discussion:
These findings validate HoFC and underscore the importance of the FC construction method in capturing intrinsic characteristics of the human brain.
Impact Statement
The impact of this article on the literature is multifaceted. It offers insights into which method of functional connectivity construction best captures homotopic functional connectivity (HoFC), a significant characteristic of the human brain. In addition, it addresses an important gap in the literature by demonstrating that partial correlation is the most suitable connectivity construction method for random walk node embedding techniques. Furthermore, this work marks the first validation of HoFC through machine learning feature vectors. Finally, our study provides insights to validate machine learning methods using inherent characteristics of the human brain, rather than relying solely on traditional machine learning evaluation metrics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamA, PedregosaF, EickenbergM, et al.Machine learning for neuroimaging with scikit-learn. Front Neuroinform, 2014; 8:14; doi: 10.3389/fninf.2014.00014
2.
BassettDS, GazzanigaMS. Understanding complexity in the human brain. Trends Cogn Sci, 2011; 15(5):200–209; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.03.006
BiswalB, YetkinFZ, HaughtonVM, et al.Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI. Magn Reson Med, 1995; 34(4):537–541; doi: 10.1002/mrm.1910340409
7.
BrierMR, MitraA, McCarthyJE, et al.Partial covariance based functional connectivity computation using Ledoit–Wolf covariance regularization. Neuroimage, 2015; 121:29–38; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.014
8.
BucknerRL, KrienenFM, YeoBT. Opportunities and limitations of intrinsic functional connectivity MRI. Nat Neurosci, 2013; 16(7):832–837; doi: 10.1038/nn.3423
9.
ChauhanN, ChoiB-J. Classification of Alzheimer’s Disease using maximal information coefficient-based functional connectivity with an extreme learning machine. Brain Sci, 2023; 13(7):1046; doi: 10.3390/brainsci13071046
DesikanRS, SegonneF, FischlB, et al.An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest. Neuroimage, 2006; 31(3):968–980; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.021
12.
DuY, FuZ, CalhounVD. Classification and prediction of brain disorders using functional connectivity: Promising but challenging. Front Neurosci, 2018; 12:525; doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00525
13.
FoxMD, GreiciusM. Clinical applications of resting state functional connectivity. Front Syst Neurosci, 2010; 4:19; doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2010.00008
14.
GanA, GongA, DingP, et al.Computer-aided diagnosis of schizophrenia based on node2vec and Transformer. J Neurosci Methods, 2023; 389:109824; doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109824
15.
GlasserMF, SmithSM, MarcusDS, et al.The human connectome project’s neuroimaging approach. Nat Neurosci, 2016; 19(9):1175–1187; doi: 10.1038/nn.4361
16.
GlasserMF, SotiropoulosSN, WilsonJA, et al.; WU-Minn HCP Consortium. The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project. Neuroimage, 2013; 80:105–124; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.127
17.
GoyalP, FerraraE. Graph embedding techniques, applications, and performance: A survey. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2018; 151:78–94; doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.03.022
18.
GroverA, LeskovecJ. node2vec: Scalable feature learning for networks. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 2016; pp. 855–864; doi: 10.1145/2939672.2939754
19.
HermesdorfM, SundermannB, FederS, et al.Major depressive disorder: Findings of reduced homotopic connectivity and investigation of underlying structural mechanisms. Hum Brain Mapp, 2016; 37(3):1209–1217; doi: 10.1002/hbm.23100
IslamMR, TanakaT, MollaMKI. Multiband tangent space mapping and feature selection for classification of EEG during motor imagery. J Neural Eng, 2018; 15(4):046021; doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aacdee
22.
JinX, LiangX, GongG. Functional integration between the two brain hemispheres: Evidence from the homotopic functional connectivity under resting state. Front Neurosci, 2020; 14:932; doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.572315
23.
KhoslaM, JamisonK, NgoGH, et al.Machine learning in resting-state fMRI analysis. Magn Reson Imaging, 2019; 64:101–121; doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2019.05.031
24.
LamaRK, KimJ-I, KwonG-R. Classification of Alzheimer’s disease based on core-large scale brain network using multilayer extreme learning machine. Mathematics, 2022; 10(12):1967; doi: 10.3390/math10121967
25.
LedoitO, WolfM. A well-conditioned estimator for large-dimensional covariance matrices. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 2004; 88(2):365–411; doi: 10.1016/j.jmva.2003.10.012
26.
LevakovG, FaskowitzJ, AvidanG, et al.Mapping individual differences across brain network structure to function and behavior with connectome embedding. Neuroimage, 2021; 242:118469; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118469
27.
LiuR, KrishnanA. PecanPy: A fast, efficient and parallelized Python implementation of node2vec. Bioinformatics, 2021; 37(19):3377–3379; doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab202
28.
LoweMJ, MockBJ, SorensonJA. Functional connectivity in single and multislice echoplanar imaging using resting-state fluctuations. Neuroimage, 1998; 7(2):119–132; doi: 10.1006/nimg.1997.0315
29.
MarcusDS, HarwellJ, OlsenT, et al.Informatics and data mining tools and strategies for the human connectome project. Front Neuroinform, 2011; 5:4; doi: 10.3389/fninf.2011.00004
30.
MasseyFJ.Jr., The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1951; 46(253):68–78; doi: 10.2307/2280095
31.
MikolovT, ChenK, CorradoG, et al.Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv, 2013; doi: 10.4855/0/arXiv.1301.3781; preprint arXiv:1301.3781.
32.
MuldersPC, van EijndhovenPF, ScheneAH, et al.Resting-state functional connectivity in major depressive disorder: A review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2015; 56:330–344; doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.07.014
33.
OgawaS, LeeT-M, KayAR, et al.Brain magnetic resonance imaging with contrast dependent on blood oxygenation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1990; 87(24):9868–9872; doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.24.9868
34.
PearlJ. Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statist Surv, 2009; 3:96–146; doi: 10.1214/09-SS057
35.
RahimiaslM, CharkariNM, GhaderiF. Random walks on B distributed resting-state functional connectivity to identify Alzheimer’s disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment. Clinical Neurophysiology, 2021; 132(10):2540–2550; doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.06.021
36.
RaichleME, MacLeodAM, SnyderAZ, et al.A default mode of brain function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2001; 98(2):676–682; doi: 10.1073/pnas.98.2.676
37.
ReidAT, HeadleyDB, MillRD, et al.Advancing functional connectivity research from association to causation. Nat Neurosci, 2019; 22(11):1751–1760; doi: 10.1038/s41593-019-0510-4
38.
RosenthalG, VašaF, GriffaA, et al.Mapping higher-order relations between brain structure and function with embedded vector representations of connectomes. Nat Commun, 2018; 9(1):2178; doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04614-w
39.
RoutierA, MarcouxA, MeloMD, et al.New advances in the Clinica software platform for clinical neuroimaging studie. In: OHBM 2019-Annual Meeting on Organization for Human Brain Mapping. 2019.
40.
Salimi-KhorshidiG, DouaudG, BeckmannCF, et al.Automatic denoising of functional MRI data: Combining independent component analysis and hierarchical fusion of classifiers. Neuroimage, 2014; 90:449–468; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.046
41.
SalvadorR, SucklingJ, ColemanMR, et al.Neurophysiological architecture of functional magnetic resonance images of human brain. Cereb Cortex, 2005; 15(9):1332–1342; doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhi016
ShenK, MišićB, CipolliniBN, et al.Stable long-range interhemispheric coordination is supported by direct anatomical projections. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2015; 112(20):6473–6478; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1503436112
44.
SmithSL, TurbanDH, HamblinS, et al.Closed form word embedding alignment. arXiv, 2017a; doi: 10.1007/s10115-020-01531-7; preprint arXiv:1702.03859.
45.
SmithSL, TurbanDH, HamblinS, et al.Offline bilingual word vectors, orthogonal transformations and the inverted softmax. arXiv, 2017b; doi: 10.4855/0/arXiv.1702.03859; preprint arXiv:1702.03859.
46.
SmithSM, BeckmannCF, AnderssonJ, et al.; WU-Minn HCP Consortium. Resting-state fMRI in the human connectome project. Neuroimage, 2013; 80:144–168; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.039
47.
SmithSM, VidaurreD, BeckmannCF, et al.Functional connectomics from resting-state fMRI. Trends Cogn Sci, 2013; 17(12):666–682; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.012
48.
SmithSM, MillerKL, Salimi-KhorshidiG, et al.Network modelling methods for FMRI. Neuroimage, 2011; 54(2):875–891; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.063
49.
SpirtesP, GlymourC, ScheinesR. and Causation, Prediction, and Search. MIT press; 2001; doi: 10.7551/mitpress/1754.001.0001
50.
SpornsO. Structure and function of complex brain networks. Dialogues Clin Neurosci, 2013; 15(3):247–262; doi: 10.3188/7/DCNS.2013.15.3/osporns
51.
SpornsO. Connectome networks: from cells to systems. In: Micro-, Meso- and Macro-Connectomics of the Brain. Springer International Publishing; 2016a; pp. 107–127; doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-27777-6_6
52.
SpornsO. Discovering the Human Connectome. MIT press; 2012; doi: 10.7551/mitpress/9266.001.0001
53.
SpornsO. Networks of the Brain. MIT Press; 2016b; doi: 10.7551/mitpress/8476.001.0001
54.
TangC, ZhaoZ, ChenC, et al.Decreased functional connectivity of homotopic brain regions in chronic stroke patients: A resting state fMRI study. PLoS One, 2016; 11(4):e0152875; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152875
55.
Van Den HeuvelMP, Hulshoff PolHE. Exploring the brain network: A review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2010; 20(8):519–534; doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2010.03.008
56.
Van EssenDC, UgurbilK, AuerbachE, et al.; WU-Minn HCP Consortium. The human connectome project: A data acquisition perspective. Neuroimage, 2012; 62(4):2222–2231; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.018
57.
VaroquauxG, CraddockRC. Learning and comparing functional connectomes across subjects. Neuroimage, 2013; 80:405–415; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.068
58.
VaroquauxG, GramfortA, PolineJ-B, et al.Brain covariance selection: Better individual functional connectivity models using population prior. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2010; 23.
VergunS, DeshpandeAS, MeierTB, et al.Characterizing functional connectivity differences in aging adults using machine learning on resting state fMRI data. Front Comput Neurosci, 2013; 7:38; doi: 10.3389/fncom.2013.00038
61.
WangC, RaoW, GuoW, et al.Towards understanding the instability of network embedding. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng, 2022; 34(2):927–941; doi: 10.1109/TKDE.2020.2989512
62.
WuZ, PanS, ChenF, et al.A comprehensive survey on graph neural networks. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst, 2021; 32(1):4–24; doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2020.2978386
63.
YanX, KongR, XueA, et al.Homotopic local-global parcellation of the human cerebral cortex from restingstate functional connectivity. Neuroimage, 2023; 273:120010; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120010
64.
ZuoX-N, KellyC, Di MartinoA, et al.Growing together and growing apart: Regional and sex differences in the lifespan developmental trajectories of functional homotopy. J Neurosci, 2010; 30(45):15034–15043; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1168-10.2010
