Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 209

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI: Is linear correlation sufficient?

Open access
Hlinka, Jaroslav, Paluš, Milan, Vejmelka, Martin, Mantini, Dante, Corbetta, Maurizio·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

Functional connectivity (FC) analysis is a prominent approach to analyzing fMRI data, especially acquired under the resting state condition. The commonly used linear correlation FC measure bears an implicit assumption of Gaussianity of the dependence structure. If only the marginals, but not all the bivariate distributions are Gaussian, linear correlation consistently underestimates the strength of the dependence. To assess the suitability of linear correlation and the general potential of nonlinear FC measures, we present a framework for testing and estimating the deviation from Gaussianity by means of comparing mutual information in the data and its Gaussianized counterpart. We apply this method to 24 sessions of human resting state fMRI. For each session, matrix of connectivities between 90 anatomical parcel time series is computed using mutual information and compared to results from its multivariate Gaussian surrogate that conserves the correlations but cancels any nonlinearity. While the group-level tests confirmed non-Gaussianity in the FC, the quantitative assessment revealed that the portion of mutual information neglected by linear correlation is relatively minor—on average only about 5% of the mutual information already captured by the linear correlation. The marginality of the non-Gaussianity was confirmed in comparisons using clustering of the parcels—the disagreement between clustering obtained from mutual information and linear correlation was attributable to random error. We conclude that for this type of data, practical relevance of nonlinear methods trying to improve over linear correlation might be limited by the fact that the data are indeed almost Gaussian.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.042

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Hlinka, J., Paluš, M., Vejmelka, M., Mantini, D., & Corbetta, M.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-02
Volume
54
Issue
3
Pages
2218-2225
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991971712
Cited by
209
References
5
FWCI
3.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI: Is linear correlation sufficient? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.042
The paper
Hlinka, J., Paluš, M., Vejmelka, M., Mantini, D., & Corbetta, M. (2011). Functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI: Is linear correlation sufficient? NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.042

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.