ArticleInformation sciences2026
Machine Learning on Dynamic Functional Connectivity: Promise, Pitfalls, and Interpretations.
Article in Information sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An unprecedented amount of existing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data provides a new opportunity to understand how functional fluctuations relate to human cognition/behavior using data-driven approaches. To this end, tremendous efforts have been made in machine learning to decode cognitive states from evolving volumetric images of blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signals. However, due to the complex nature of brain function, the performance and findings of current deep learning models remain inconsistent across tasks, datasets, and evaluation settings. In this work, by capitalizing on large-scale existing neuroimaging data (39,784 fMRI samples from seven databases), we seek to establish a well-founded empirical guideline for designing deep models in functional neuroimaging by linking the methodology underpinning with neuroscientific understanding. Specifically, we put the spotlight on (1) What is the performance landscape of various models in cognitive task recognition and disease diagnosis? (2) What are the key limitations and trade-offs of current deep models? and (3) What is the general guideline for selecting the suitable machine learning backbone for specific neuroimaging applications? We have conducted comprehensive evaluations and statistical analysis across cognitive and clinical scenarios, to answer the above outstanding questions. Our findings demonstrate that no universal model dominates all scenarios; instead, model effectiveness depends on factors such as demographics, task type, and disease stage. Furthermore, we introduce an attention-based interpretability method to reveal spatial patterns of brain activation associated with tasks and disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.