Comparison Between Gradients and Parcellations for Functional Connectivity Prediction of Behavior
Ru KongiD, Yan Rui Tan, Naren WulaniD, Leon Qi Rong OoiiD, Seyedeh-Rezvan FarahibozorgiD, Samuel J. HarrisoniD, Janine Diane BijsterboschiD, Boris C. BernhardtiD, Simon Bodo EickhoffiD, B.T. Thomas YeoiD
Abstract
Resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) is widely used to predict behavioral measures. To predict behavioral measures, representing RSFC with parcellations and gradients are the two most popular approaches. Here, we compare parcellation and gradient approaches for RSFC-based prediction of a broad range of behavioral measures in the Human Connectome Project (HCP) and Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) datasets. Among the parcellation approaches, we consider group-average "hard" parcellations (Schaefer et al., 2018), individual-specific "hard" parcellations (Kong et al., 2021a), and an individual-specific "soft" parcellation (spatial independent component analysis with dual regression; Beckmann et al., 2009). For gradient approaches, we consider the well-known principal gradients (Margulies et al., 2016) and the local gradient approach that detects local RSFC changes (Laumann et al., 2015). Across two regression algorithms, individual-specific hard-parcellation performs the best in the HCP dataset, while the principal gradients, spatial independent component analysis and group-average "hard" parcellations exhibit similar performance. On the other hand, principal gradients and all parcellation approaches perform similarly in the ABCD dataset. Across both datasets, local gradients perform the worst. Finally, we find that the principal gradient approach requires at least 40 to 60 gradients to perform as well as parcellation approaches. While most principal gradient studies utilize a single gradient, our results suggest that incorporating higher order gradients can provide significant behaviorally relevant information. Future work will consider the inclusion of additional parcellation and gradient approaches for comparison.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 46
- FWCI
- 6.87
- Field percentile
- top 2%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Individual-Specific Areal-Level Parcellations Improve Functional Connectivity Prediction of Behavior
Ru Kong, Qing Yang, … B.T. Thomas Yeo·Cerebral CortexPeer-reviewed·Mar 31, 2021
- Functional connectivity gradients as a common neural architecture for predictive processing in the human brain
Yuta Katsumi, Jiahe Zhang, … Lisa Feldman Barrett·Communications BiologyPeer-reviewed·Apr 12, 2023
- Fast Connectivity Gradient Approximation: Maintaining spatially fine-grained connectivity gradients while reducing computational costs
Karl‐Heinz Nenning, Ting Xu, … Michael Peter Milham·Communications BiologyPeer-reviewed·Jun 6, 2024
- From Intrinsic Topography to Cognitive Prediction: Benchmarking Approaches to Personalized Cortical Parcellation
Yusuf Coşku Inceler, Micha Burkhardt, … Daniel Kristanto·bioRxiv·Oct 12, 2026
- Jumping over Baselines with New Methods to Predict Activation Maps from Resting-state fMRI
Eric Lacosse, Klaus Scheffler, … Georg Martius·Scientific ReportsPeer-reviewed·Feb 10, 2021
- Brain Connectivity Modelling Through Joint Estimation of Parcels and Gradients
Aref Miri Rekavandi, Saâd Jbabdi, Stephen M. Smith·bioRxiv·Jun 28, 2026