Back

A Hybrid Communication Pattern in Brain Structural Network Revealed by Evolutionary Computation

LIANG, Q.; Lin, Y.; Dai, Z.; Ma, J.; Chen, X.

2021-11-25 neuroscience
10.1101/2021.11.25.469862 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The human brain functional connectivity network (FCN) is constrained and shaped by the communication processes in the structural connectivity network (SCN). The underlying communication mechanism thus becomes a critical issue for understanding the formation and organization of the FCN. A number of communication models supported by different routing strategies have been proposed, with shortest path (SP), random diffusion (DIF), and spatial navigation (NAV) as the most typical, respectively requiring network global knowledge, local knowledge, and both for path seeking. Yet these models all assumed every brain region to use one routing strategy uniformly, ignoring convergent evidence that supports the regional heterogeneity in both terms of biological substrates and functional roles. In this regard, the current study developed a hybrid communication model that allowed each brain region to choose a routing strategy from SP, DIF, and NAV independently. A genetic algorithm was designed to uncover the underlying region-wise hybrid routing strategy (namely HYB). The HYB was found to outperform the three typical routing strategies in predicting FCN and facilitating robust communication. Analyses on HYB further revealed that brain regions in lower-order functional modules inclined to route signals using global knowledge, while those in higher-order functional modules preferred DIF that requires only local knowledge. Compared to regions that used global knowledge for routing, regions using DIF had denser structural connections, participated in more functional modules, but played a less dominant role within modules. Together, our findings further evidenced that hybrid routing underpins efficient SCN communication and locally heterogeneous structure-function coupling.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.