Dǝve Derıso
The Ultimate FMRI Paper This is a figure from the 2009 Steve Smith paper. Think of it as a paper that uses ICA to review our main findings of FMRI studies of cognition. Sounds daunting, but with a sample size of 30,000, its credible. Take a gander at the neat graph above. Each # on the x-axis corresponds to a network of brain areas (outlined in the Supplementary Info link below). The y-axis lists several cognitive proceses. The green graph indicates which networks are involved each of these processes and has a color code to indicate the % BOLD signal change seen in these networks for the respective tasks. My response was: (1) I need to read more articles by Dr. Steve Smith, (2) we dont need to keep looking at these areas for “cognition studies,” (3) collective brain-data repostories are worthwhile, (4) review papers like these are possible now. At the end of the day, this is quite possibly the most insane paper i have ever read. I take issue with only 1 factor in such a large scale experiment —quality control. 30,000 brains/365 days = 82 brains per day or 10.25 brains per hour (assuming an 8 hour work day with no weekends for 1 full year). Who can do this without error? I love the idea, but question the attention to detail and therefore have trouble believeing the results as ‘truth’ on their own. However, since the findings do agree with previous research, I can go ahead and reject the null. Smith, S. M., Fox, P. T., Miller, K. L., Glahn, D. C., & Fox, P. M. (2009). Correspondence of the brain’s functional architecture during activation and rest. PNAS, 106(31), 13040-13045.  Smith, S. M., Fox, P. T., Miller, K. L., Glahn, D. C., & Fox, P. M. (2009). Correspondence of the brain’s functional architecture during activation and rest. PNAS, 106(31), 13040-13045.  Supporting Information 

The Ultimate FMRI Paper

This is a figure from the 2009 Steve Smith paper. Think of it as a paper that uses ICA to review our main findings of FMRI studies of cognition. Sounds daunting, but with a sample size of 30,000, its credible. Take a gander at the neat graph above. Each # on the x-axis corresponds to a network of brain areas (outlined in the Supplementary Info link below). The y-axis lists several cognitive proceses. The green graph indicates which networks are involved each of these processes and has a color code to indicate the % BOLD signal change seen in these networks for the respective tasks.

My response was: (1) I need to read more articles by Dr. Steve Smith, (2) we dont need to keep looking at these areas for “cognition studies,” (3) collective brain-data repostories are worthwhile, (4) review papers like these are possible now. At the end of the day, this is quite possibly the most insane paper i have ever read. I take issue with only 1 factor in such a large scale experiment —quality control. 30,000 brains/365 days = 82 brains per day or 10.25 brains per hour (assuming an 8 hour work day with no weekends for 1 full year). Who can do this without error? I love the idea, but question the attention to detail and therefore have trouble believeing the results as ‘truth’ on their own. However, since the findings do agree with previous research, I can go ahead and reject the null.


Smith, S. M., Fox, P. T., Miller, K. L., Glahn, D. C., & Fox, P. M. (2009). Correspondence of the brain’s functional architecture during activation and rest. PNAS, 106(31), 13040-13045.

 

Smith, S. M., Fox, P. T., Miller, K. L., Glahn, D. C., & Fox, P. M. (2009). Correspondence of the brain’s functional architecture during activation and rest. PNAS, 106(31), 13040-13045. 

Supporting Information 
read comments
Designed By Dave Deriso © 2010