000888566 001__ 888566
000888566 005__ 20210130011029.0
000888566 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/26406
000888566 037__ $$aFZJ-2020-05030
000888566 041__ $$aEnglish
000888566 1001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131880$$aPopovych, Oleksandr$$b0$$eCorresponding author$$ufzj
000888566 1112_ $$aThe 10th NIC Symposium of the John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC)$$cJülich$$d2020-02-27 - 2020-02-28$$gNIC Symposium 2020$$wGermany
000888566 245__ $$aOptimizing Current Imaging Pipelines by Whole-Brain Dynamical Models
000888566 260__ $$c2020
000888566 3367_ $$033$$2EndNote$$aConference Paper
000888566 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aINPROCEEDINGS
000888566 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aconferenceObject
000888566 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aCONFERENCE_POSTER
000888566 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Conference Poster
000888566 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)24$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aPoster$$bposter$$mposter$$s1607420571_9746$$xInvited
000888566 502__ $$cHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
000888566 520__ $$aProcessing of neuroimaging data and extraction of the structural and functional brain signals relies on plethora of setting and parameters whose values are largely conjectured. This problem is crucial for simulating the whole-brain dynamics by mathematical models derived from and validated against empirical data, which has attracted a great interest during the last decade. For example, considering a certain brain parcellation is essential for defining a model network, but there is practically no empirical evidence for the effect of a particular atlas choice. We address this problem using a computational modeling approach, where the resting-state brain dynamics as reflected by fMRI BOLD is simulated by a dynamical model of coupled oscillators. We considered a system of coupled phase oscillators, where the coupling weights and delays were extracted from empirical structural connectivity (eSC). We compared the modeling outcome for three different brain parcellations as given by the functional Schaefer atlas with 100 and 200 cortical parcels (S100 and S200) and anatomical Harvard-Oxford atlas with 96 parcels (HO96). The natural frequencies of the model oscillators were extracted from non-filtered (NF) BOLD signal as well as filtered in different frequency bands including the broad- (BF), low- (LF) and high- (HF) frequency bands. The model was validated by finding the optimal model parameters of the global coupling and delay, where the strongest similarity as revealed by Pearson’s correlation between simulated and empirical functional connectivity (sFC and eFC) or between sFC and eSC is achieved. We found that the maximal similarity between functional data demonstrates a moderate  improvement of the model fitting when comparing S200 to S100, and there is a strong enhancement when comparing HO96 to S100 and S200. For the structure-function relationship between sFC and eSC, the ordering NF < BF < LF < HF can be observed, but the differences between atlases are less consistent. We found that HF condition can lead to distinct distributions of the optimal model parameters than other frequency bands, and the corresponding fitting results less correlate with those obtained for other frequency bands. Finally, the dynamics of the validated model can result in pronounced bimodal distributions of the order parameter R(t) and other quantities characterizing the model fitting for S100 and S200, but not for HO96. We thus showed that a choice of a particular brain parcellation and variation of BOLD frequency band can cause a significant impact on the quality of the model fitting, dynamics of the validated model and their interrelations. The main impact of the brain atlases can be observed for the fitting of sFC to eFC. The frequency bands of the BOLD filtering mostly affect structure-function relationships and can also influence the reliability of the model validation.
000888566 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-574$$a574 - Theory, modelling and simulation (POF3-574)$$cPOF3-574$$fPOF III$$x0
000888566 536__ $$0G:(EU-Grant)826421$$aVirtualBrainCloud - Personalized Recommendations for Neurodegenerative Disease (826421)$$c826421$$fH2020-SC1-DTH-2018-1$$x1
000888566 65027 $$0V:(DE-MLZ)SciArea-190$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aMedicine$$x0
000888566 65017 $$0V:(DE-MLZ)GC-130-2016$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aHealth and Life$$x0
000888566 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)164577$$aManos, Thanos$$b1
000888566 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)165859$$aDiaz, Sandra$$b2$$ufzj
000888566 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131684$$aHoffstaedter, Felix$$b3$$ufzj
000888566 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)169295$$aSchreiber, Jan$$b4$$ufzj
000888566 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aEickhoff, Simon$$b5$$ufzj
000888566 8564_ $$uhttp://www.john-von-neumann-institut.de/nic/EN/News/Symposium/NIC-Symposium-2020/PosterSession/BIO_13.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
000888566 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/888566/files/Optimizing%20Current%20Imaging%20Pipelines%20by%20Whole-Brain%20Dynamical%20Models.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000888566 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:888566$$pec_fundedresources$$pdriver$$pVDB$$popen_access$$popenaire
000888566 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131880$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b0$$kFZJ
000888566 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)165859$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000888566 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131684$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b3$$kFZJ
000888566 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)169295$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
000888566 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b5$$kFZJ
000888566 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-574$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-570$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lDecoding the Human Brain$$vTheory, modelling and simulation$$x0
000888566 9141_ $$y2020
000888566 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000888566 920__ $$lyes
000888566 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406$$kINM-7$$lGehirn & Verhalten$$x0
000888566 980__ $$aposter
000888566 980__ $$aVDB
000888566 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000888566 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406
000888566 9801_ $$aFullTexts