Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025-10
Studying Time-Resolved Functional Connectivity via Communication Theory: On the Complementary Nature of Phase Synchronization and Sliding Window Pearson Correlation
Time-resolved functional network connectivity (trFNC) assesses the time-resolved coupling between brain regions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. This study aims to compare two techniques used to estimate trFNC, to investigate their similarities and differences when applied to fMRI data. These techniques are the sliding window Pearson correlation (SWPC), an amplitude-based approach, and phase synchrony (PS), a phase-based technique.
Methods:
To accomplish our objective, we used resting-state fMRI data from the Human Connectome Project with 827 subjects [repetition time (TR): 0.7 sec] and the Function Biomedical Informatics Research Network with 311 subjects (TR: 2 sec), which included 151 schizophrenia (SZ) patients and 160 controls.
Results:
Our simulations reveal distinct strengths in two connectivity methods: SWPC captures high-magnitude, low-frequency connectivity, whereas PS detects low-magnitude, high-frequency connectivity. Stronger correlations between SWPC and PS align with pronounced fMRI oscillations. For fMRI data, higher correlations between SWPC and PS occur with matched frequencies and smaller SWPC window sizes (∼30 sec), but larger windows (∼88 sec) sacrifice clinically relevant information. Both methods identify a SZ-associated brain network state but show different patterns: SWPC highlights low anticorrelations between visual, subcortical, auditory, and sensory-motor networks, whereas PS shows reduced positive synchronization among these networks.
Conclusion:
In sum, our findings underscore the complementary nature of SWPC and PS, elucidating their respective strengths and limitations without implying the superiority of one over the other.
Impact Statement
This study demonstrates that SWPC and PS provide complementary insights into dynamic functional connectivity, revealing different aspects of brain dynamics based on signal focus. For tasks involving slow dynamics, SWPC amplitude is ideal, whereas the PS phase is more suitable for transient dynamics. In schizophrenia, typically associated with general dysconnectivity, we uncover a dual dysconnectivity profile depending on phase or amplitude dynamics. This novel approach offers researchers a platform to explore task-specific dysconnectivity profiles, enabling more targeted interventions. These findings will guide methodology choices, deepen understanding of brain dynamics, and support the development of precise neuropsychiatric biomarkers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AchardS, SalvadorR, WhitcherB, et al.A resilient, low-frequency, small-world human brain functional network with highly connected association cortical hubs. J Neurosci, 2006; 26:63–72.
2.
AggarwalCC, HinneburgA, KeimDA. On the surprising behavior of distance metrics in high dimensional space. In: Database Theory—ICDT 2001: 8th International Conference London, UK, January 4–6, 2001 Proceedings 8. Springer, 2001, pp. 420–434.
3.
AllenEA, DamarajuE, PlisSM, et al.Tracking whole-brain connectivity dynamics in the resting state. Cereb Cortex, 2014; 24(3):663–676; doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs352
4.
AllenG, BarnardH, MccollR, et al.Reduced hippocampal functional connectivity in Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol, 2007; 64(10):1482–1487.
5.
AnticevicA, GancsosM, MurrayJD, et al.NMDA receptor function in large-scale anticorrelated neural systems with implications for cognition and schizophrenia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2012; 109(41):16720–16725; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208494109
6.
AnticevicA, HautK, MurrayJD, et al.Association of thalamic dysconnectivity and conversion to psychosis in youth and young adults at elevated clinical risk. JAMA Psychiatry, 2015; 72(9):882–891; doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0566
7.
BedrosianE. Product theorem for Hilbert transforms, Rand Corporation; 1962.
8.
BenjaminiY, HochbergY. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B, 1995; 57(1):289–300.
9.
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
10.
BoashashB. Estimating and interpreting the instantaneous frequency of a signal. I. Fundamentals. In Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 80. IEEE; 1992, pp. 520–538.
11.
BoccalettiS, KurthsJ, OsipovG, et al.The synchronization of chaotic systems. Phys Rep, 2002; 366(1–2):1–101.
12.
BraunU, PlichtaMM, EsslingerC, et al.Test–retest reliability of resting-state connectivity network characteristics using fMRI and graph theoretical measures. Neuroimage, 2012; 59(2):1404–1412; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.044
13.
CalhounVD, AdaliT, PearlsonGD, et al.A method for making group inferences from functional MRI data using independent component analysis. Hum Brain Mapp, 2001; 14(3):140–151.
14.
CalhounVD, KiehlKA, LiddlePF, et al.Aberrant localization of synchronous hemodynamic activity in auditory cortex reliably characterizes schizophrenia. Biol Psychiatry, 2004; 55(8):842–849.
15.
CalhounV, KimJ, PearlsonG. FMRI connectivity measured by mutual information and correlation: Linear dependence vs. General dependence. In: Proceedings of the 7th ISMRM Scientific Meeting. ISMRM; 2003.
16.
CalhounVD, MillerR, PearlsonG, et al.The chronnectome: Time-varying connectivity networks as the next frontier in fMRI data discovery. Neuron, 2014; 84(2):262–274; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.10.015
17.
ChangC, GloverGH. Time–frequency dynamics of resting-state brain connectivity measured with fMRI. Neuroimage, 2010; 50(1):81–98; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.011
18.
ChavezM, BesserveM, AdamC, et al.Towards a proper estimation of phase synchronization from time series. J Neurosci Methods, 2006; 154(1–2):149–160.
19.
ChhatwalJP, SchultzAP, JohnsonK, et al.Impaired default network functional connectivity in autosomal dominant Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 2013; 81(8):736–744.
20.
DamarajuE, AllenEA, BelgerA, et al.Dynamic functional connectivity analysis reveals transient states of dysconnectivity in schizophrenia. Neuroimage Clin, 2014; 5:298–308; doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.07.003
21.
DamoiseauxJS, RomboutsSA, BarkhofF, et al.Consistent resting-state networks across healthy subjects. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2006; 103(37):13848–13853.
22.
DorflerF, BulloF. Synchronization and transient stability in power networks and nonuniform Kuramoto oscillators. SIAM J Control Optim, 2012; 50(3):1616–1642.
23.
DuY, FuZ, SuiJ, et al.; Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. NeuroMark: An automated and adaptive ICA based pipeline to identify reproducible fMRI markers of brain disorders. Neuroimage Clin, 2020; 28:102375; doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102375
24.
DuY, PearlsonGD, YuQ, et al.Interaction among subsystems within default mode network diminished in schizophrenia patients: A dynamic connectivity approach. Schizophr Res, 2016; 170(1):55–65.
25.
EickhoffSB, BzdokD, LairdAR, et al.Co-activation patterns distinguish cortical modules, their connectivity and functional differentiation. Neuroimage, 2011; 57(3):938–949.
26.
FagerholmED, MoranRJ, ViolanteIR, et al.Breaking the bonds of weak coupling: The dynamic causal modelling of oscillator amplitudes. arXiv Preprint, 2018arXiv:1812.06315.
27.
FagerholmED, MoranRJ, ViolanteIR, et al.Dynamic causal modelling of phase-amplitude interactions. Neuroimage, 2020; 208:116452.
28.
FagerholmED, ScottG, ShewWL, et al.Cortical entropy, mutual information and scale-free dynamics in waking mice. Cereb Cortex, 2016; 26(10):3945–3952.
29.
FaghiriA, AdaliT, CalhounVD. Single sideband modulation as a tool to improve functional connectivity estimation. In: 2022 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI). IEEE; 2022a, pp. 1–4.
30.
FaghiriA, IrajiA, DamarajuE, et al.Weighted average of shared trajectory: A new estimator for dynamic functional connectivity efficiently estimates both rapid and slow changes over time. J Neurosci Methods, 2020; 334:108600.
31.
FaghiriA, IrajiA, DamarajuE, et al.A unified approach for characterizing static/dynamic connectivity frequency profiles using filter banks. Network Neurosci, 2021; 5(1):56–82.
32.
FaghiriA, IrajiA, DudaM, et al.A unified framework for modularizing and comparing time-resolved functional connectivity methods. In: 2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC). IEEE; 2022b, pp. 4631–4634.
33.
FaghiriA, YangK, IshizukaK, et al.Frequency modulation increases the specificity of time-resolved connectivity: A resting-state fMRI study. Netw Neurosci, 2024; 8(3):734–761; doi: 10.1162/netn_a_00372
34.
FingelkurtsAA, FingelkurtsAA, KähkönenS. Functional connectivity in the brain—is it an elusive concept? Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2005; 28(8):827–836; doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.10.009
35.
FlorinE, BailletS. The brain’s resting-state activity is shaped by synchronized cross-frequency coupling of neural oscillations. Neuroimage, 2015; 111:26–35; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.054
FuZ, BattaI, WuL, et al.Searching Reproducible Brain Features using NeuroMark: Templates for Different Age Populations and Imaging Modalities. Neuroimage, 2024; 292:120617; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120617
38.
FuZ, CaprihanA, ChenJ, et al.Altered static and dynamic functional network connectivity in Alzheimer’s disease and subcortical ischemic vascular disease: Shared and specific brain connectivity abnormalities. Hum Brain Mapp, 2019; 40(11):3203–3221.
39.
GlereanE, SalmiJ, LahnakoskiJM, et al.Functional magnetic resonance imaging phase synchronization as a measure of dynamic functional connectivity. Brain Connect, 2012; 2(2):91–101; doi: 10.1089/brain.2011.0068
40.
GradyCL, GarrettDD. Understanding variability in the BOLD signal and why it matters for aging. Brain Imaging Behav, 2014; 8(2):274–283; doi: 10.1007/s11682-013-9253-0
41.
GreiciusMD, KrasnowB, ReissAL, et al.Functional connectivity in the resting brain: A network analysis of the default mode hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2003; 100(1):253–258.
42.
HandwerkerDA, OllingerJM, D’espositoM. Variation of BOLD hemodynamic responses across subjects and brain regions and their effects on statistical analyses. Neuroimage, 2004; 21(4):1639–1651; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.11.029
43.
HaukeJ, KossowskiT. Comparison of values of Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation coefficients on the same sets of data. Quaestiones Geographicae, 2011; 30(2):87–93.
44.
HaykinS, MoherM. Analog & Digital Communications. John Wiley & Sons Inc: Canada; 1989.
45.
HeZ, XuC, HeW, et al.Principle and applications of multimode strong coupling based on surface plasmons. Nanomaterials, 2022; 12(8):1242.
46.
HippJF, HawellekDJ, CorbettaM, et al.Large-scale cortical correlation structure of spontaneous oscillatory activity. Nat Neurosci, 2012; 15(6):884–890; doi: 10.1038/nn.3101
47.
HonariH, ChoeAS, LindquistMA. Evaluating phase synchronization methods in fMRI: A comparison study and new approaches. Neuroimage, 2021; 228:117704.
48.
HussainS, LangleyJ, SeitzAR, et al.A novel hidden markov approach to studying dynamic functional connectivity states in human neuroimaging. Brain Connect, 2023; 13(3):154–163; doi: 10.1089/brain.2022.0031
49.
HutchisonRM, WomelsdorfT, AllenEA, et al.Dynamic functional connectivity: Promise, issues, and interpretations. Neuroimage, 2013; 80:360–378; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.079
50.
IrajiA, FaghiriA, LewisN, et al.Tools of the trade: Estimating time-varying connectivity patterns from fMRI data. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci, 2021; 16(8):849–874; doi: 10.1093/scan/nsaa114
51.
IrajiA, FuZ, DamarajuE, et al.Spatial dynamics within and between brain functional domains: A hierarchical approach to study time‐varying brain function. Hum Brain Mapp, 2019; 40(6):1969–1986.
52.
JadiMP, SejnowskiTJ. Regulating cortical oscillations in an inhibition-stabilized network. Proc IEEE Inst Electr Electron Eng, 2014; 102(5); doi: 10.1109/jproc.2014.2313113
53.
JammalamadakaSR, SenguptaA, SenguptaA. Topics in circular statistics. World Scientific; 2001.
54.
KelsoJS. Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. MIT Press; 1995.
55.
LachauxJP, RodriguezE, MartinerieJ, et al.Measuring phase synchrony in brain signals. Hum Brain Mapp, 1999; 8(4):194–208.
56.
LeeJG, SepulchreRJ. Rapid and robust synchronization via weak synaptic coupling. Automatica, 2024; 160:111416; doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2023.111416
57.
LeonardiN, VAN DE VilleD. On spurious and real fluctuations of dynamic functional connectivity during rest. Neuroimage, 2015; 104:430–436; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.007
58.
LiJ, ChengL, ChenS, et al.Functional connectivity changes in multiple-frequency bands in acute basal ganglia ischemic stroke patients: A machine learning approach. Neural Plast, 2022; 2022:1560748; doi: 10.1155/2022/1560748
59.
LynallM-E, BassettDS, KerwinR, et al.Functional connectivity and brain networks in schizophrenia. J Neurosci, 2010; 30(28):9477–9487.
60.
MajeedW, MagnusonM, KeilholzSD. Spatiotemporal dynamics of low frequency fluctuations in BOLD fMRI of the rat. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2009; 30(2):384–393.
MuldersPC, VAN EijndhovenPF, ScheneAH, et al.Resting-state functional connectivity in major depressive disorder: A review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2015; 56:330–344.
63.
NejadAB, EbdrupBH, GlenthøjBY, et al.Brain connectivity studies in schizophrenia: Unravelling the effects of antipsychotics. Curr Neuropharmacol, 2012; 10(3):219–230; doi: 10.2174/157015912803217305
64.
OmidvarniaA, PedersenM, WalzJM, et al.Dynamic regional phase synchrony (DRePS) An Instantaneous Measure of Local fMRI Connectivity Within Spatially Clustered Brain Areas. Hum Brain Mapp, 2016; 37(5):1970–1985.
65.
OppenheimAV. Discrete-time signal processing. Pearson Education India; 1999.
66.
PedersenM, OmidvarniaA, WalzJM, et al.Spontaneous brain network activity: Analysis of its temporal complexity. Network Neurosci, 2017; 1(2):100–115.
67.
PedersenM, OmidvarniaA, ZaleskyA, et al.On the relationship between instantaneous phase synchrony and correlation-based sliding windows for time-resolved fMRI connectivity analysis. Neuroimage, 2018; 181:85–94; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.020
68.
PennyWD, FristonKJ, AshburnerJT, et al.Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images. Elsevier; 2011.
69.
PicinbonoB. On instantaneous amplitude and phase of signals. IEEE Trans Signal Process, 1997; 45(3):552–560.
70.
ProakisJG, SalehiM, ZhouN, et al.Communication systems engineering, Prentice Hall: New Jersey; 1994.
71.
RebolloI, DevauchelleA-D, BérangerB, et al.Stomach-brain synchrony reveals a novel, delayed-connectivity resting-state network in humans. Elife, 2018; 7:e33321.
72.
RodenMS. Analog and digital communication systems. Prentice-Hall, Inc; 1991.
73.
RosenblumMG, PikovskyAS, KurthsJ. Phase synchronization of chaotic oscillators. Phys Rev Lett, 1996; 76(11):1804–1807.
74.
SakoğluU, PearlsonGD, KiehlKA, et al.A method for evaluating dynamic functional network connectivity and task-modulation: Application to schizophrenia. MAGMA, 2010; 23(5–6):351–366; doi: 10.1007/s10334-010-0197-8
75.
SchönbrodtFD, PeruginiM. At what sample size do correlations stabilize? J Res Pers, 2013; 47(5):609–612.
76.
SharmaDK, MishraA, SaxenaR. Analog & digital modulation techniques: An overview. Int J Comput Sci Commun Technol, 2010; 3:2007.
77.
SheffieldJM, BarchDM. Cognition and resting-state functional connectivity in schizophrenia. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2016; 61:108–120.
78.
ShelineYI, RaichleME. Resting state functional connectivity in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Biol Psychiatry, 2013; 74(5):340–347.
79.
ShirerWR, RyaliS, RykhlevskaiaE, et al.Decoding subject-driven cognitive states with whole-brain connectivity patterns. Cereb Cortex, 2012; 22(1):158–165; doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr099
80.
SiemsM, SiegelM. Dissociated neuronal phase- and amplitude-coupling patterns in the human brain. Neuroimage, 2020; 209:116538; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116538
81.
SmillieG. Analogue and digital communication techniques. Elsevier; 1999.
82.
SpornsO. Networks of the Brain, MIT press; 2016.
83.
SunFT, MillerLM, D’espositoM. Measuring interregional functional connectivity using coherence and partial coherence analyses of fMRI data. Neuroimage, 2004; 21(2):647–658.
84.
TelesfordQK, SimpsonSL, BurdetteJH, et al.The brain as a complex system: Using network science as a tool for understanding the brain. Brain Connect, 2011; 1(4):295–308.
85.
TorabiM, MitsisGD, PolineJ-B. On the variability of dynamic functional connectivity assessment methods. Gigascience, 2024; 13:giae009; doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giae009
86.
VAN DEN HeuvelMP, PolHEH. Exploring the brain network: A review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2010; 20(8):519–534.
87.
VAN EssenDC, SmithSM, BarchDM, et al.; WU-Minn HCP Consortium. The WU-Minn human connectome project: An overview. Neuroimage, 2013; 80:62–79; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.041
88.
VeerIM, BeckmannCF, VAN TolM-J, et al.Whole brain resting-state analysis reveals decreased functional connectivity in major depression. Front Syst Neurosci, 2010; 4:41.
89.
WangC, DAF. Phase demodulation using adaptive windowed Fourier transform based on Hilbert-Huang transform. Opt Express, 2012; 20(16):18459–18477.
90.
WelvaertM, RosseelY. On the definition of signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio for FMRI data. PLoS One, 2013; 8(11):e77089; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077089
91.
WiafeSL, FuZ, CalhounVD, et al.Phase and amplitude, two sides of functional connectivity. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2023; 2023:1–4; doi: 10.1109/embc40787.2023.10341073
92.
WiafeS-L, FaghiriA, FuZ, et al.Capturing Stretching and Shrinking of Inter-Network Temporal Coupling in FMRI Via WARP Elasticity. In: 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI). IEEE: Athens, Greece; 2024a.
93.
WiafeS-L, FaghiriA, FuZ, et al.The dynamics of dynamic time warping in fMRI data: A method to capture inter-network stretching and shrinking via warp elasticity. Imaging Neurosci, 2024b;2; doi: 10.1162/imag_a_00187
94.
WiafeS-L, KinseyS, IrajiA, et al.Normalized dynamic time warping increases sensitivity in differentiating functional network connectivity in schizophrenia. bioRxiv, 2024c; doi: 10.1101/2024.10.31.621415
95.
WiafeS-L, KinseyS, SoleimaniN, et al.Mapping dynamic metabolic energy distribution in brain networks using fMRI: A novel dynamic time warping framework. bioRxiv, 2025:2025.03.20.644399.
96.
XuY, YanD. The Bedrosian identity for the Hilbert transform of product functions. Proc Amer Math Soc, 2006; 134(9):2719–2728.
97.
YaesoubiM, AllenEA, MillerRL, et al.Dynamic coherence analysis of resting fMRI data to jointly capture state-based phase, frequency, and time-domain information. Neuroimage, 2015; 120:133–142; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.002
98.
ZengL-L, ShenH, LiuL, et al.Identifying major depression using whole-brain functional connectivity: A multivariate pattern analysis. Brain, 2012; 135(Pt 5):1498–1507.
99.
ZhanX, MaT, LiuS, et al.On circular correlation for data on the torus. Stat Papers, 2019; 60(6):1827–1847.
100.
ZhangG, CaiB, ZhangA, et al.Estimating dynamic functional brain connectivity with a sparse hidden markov model. IEEE Trans Med Imaging, 2020; 39(2):488–498; doi: 10.1109/tmi.2019.2929959
101.
ZhangY, PanX, WangR, et al.Functional connectivity between prefrontal cortex and striatum estimated by phase locking value. Cogn Neurodyn, 2016; 10(3):245–254.
102.
ZhouJ, ZhuH, WangJ, et al.Dynamic characteristics of local functional connectivity revealed by dynamic regional phase synchrony. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng, 2023; 31:2507–2517; doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2023.3276896
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.
