Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31783117›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2020

Comparing functional connectivity matrices: A geometry-aware approach applied to participant identification.

Manasij Venkatesh, Joseph Jaja, Luiz Pessoa

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Cerebellar Connectome.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  2. CA1 Engram Cell Dynamics Before and After Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Manasij VenkateshDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. Electronic address: manasij@umd.edu.
Joseph JajaDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Luiz PessoaDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA; Department of Psychology and Maryland Neuroimaging Center, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. Electronic address: pessoa@umd.edu.

Funding

Mapping the Human Connectome: Structure, Function, and HeritabilityU54MH091657 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI UGURBIL, KAMIL, VAN ESSEN, DAVID C · 2010 to 2014
$34.7M
INTERACTION OF EMOTIONAL PERCEPTION AND VISUAL ATTENTIONR01MH071589 · NIMH · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI PESSOA, LUIZ · 2004 to 2024
$8.9M
Dynamics of Large-Scale Networks During Emotional and Social ProcessingR01MH112517 · NIMH · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI PESSOA, LUIZ, REDCAY, ELIZABETH · 2017 to 2021
$3.3M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH071589NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH112517NIMH NIH HHS U54 MH091657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the correlation structure associated with multiple brain measurements informs about potential "functional groupings" and network organization. The correlation structure can be conveniently captured in a matrix format that summarizes the relationships among a set of brain measurements involving two regions, for example. Such functional connectivity matrix is an important component of many types of investigation focusing on network-level properties of the brain, including clustering brain states, characterizing dynamic functional states, performing participant identification (so-called "fingerprinting") understanding how tasks reconfigure brain networks, and inter-subject correlation analysis. In these investigations, some notion of proximity or similarity of functional connectivity matrices is employed, such as their Euclidean distance or Pearson correlation (by correlating the matrix entries). Here, we propose the use of a geodesic distance metric that reflects the underlying non-Euclidean geometry of functional correlation matrices. The approach is evaluated in the context of participant identification (fingerprinting): given a participant's functional connectivity matrix based on resting-state or task data, how effectively can the participant be identified? Using geodesic distance, identification accuracy was over 95% on resting-state data, and exceeded the Pearson correlation approach by 20%. For whole-cortex regions, accuracy improved on a range of tasks by between 2% and as much as 20%. We also investigated identification using pairs of subnetworks (say, dorsal attention plus default mode), and particular combinations improved accuracy over whole-cortex participant identification by over 10%. The geodesic distance also outperformed Pearson correlation when the former employed a fourth of the data as the latter. Finally, we suggest that low-dimensional distance visualizations based on the geodesic approach help uncover the geometry of task functional connectivity in relation to that during resting-state. We propose that the use of the geodesic distance is an effective way to compare the correlation structure of the brain across a broad range of studies.

Indexed as

AttentionAwarenessBrainBrain MappingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNerve NetNeural PathwaysRest

Identifiers

PMID31783117
PMCPMC6995445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.