Cited by 191Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesUndergraduate Neuroscience Education and ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

A Shared Vision for Machine Learning in Neuroscience

Open access
Vu, Mai-Anh T., Adalı, Tülay, Ba, Demba, Buzsáki, György, Carlson, David, Heller, Katherine, Liston, Conor, Rudin, Cynthia +5 more·2018·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

With ever-increasing advancements in technology, neuroscientists are able to collect data in greater volumes and with finer resolution. The bottleneck in understanding how the brain works is consequently shifting away from the amount and type of data we can collect and toward what we actually do with the data. There has been a growing interest in leveraging this vast volume of data across levels of analysis, measurement techniques, and experimental paradigms to gain more insight into brain function. Such efforts are visible at an international scale, with the emergence of big data neuroscience initiatives, such as the BRAIN initiative (Bargmann et al., 2014), the Human Brain Project, the Human Connectome Project, and the National Institute of Mental Health's Research Domain Criteria initiative. With these large-scale projects, much thought has been given to data-sharing across groups (Poldrack and Gorgolewski, 2014; Sejnowski et al., 2014); however, even with such data-sharing initiatives, funding mechanisms, and infrastructure, there still exists the challenge of how to cohesively integrate all the data. At multiple stages and levels of neuroscience investigation, machine learning holds great promise as an addition to the arsenal of analysis tools for discovering how the brain works.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.0508-17.2018

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 52 · Cited by 191

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rescorla RA, Wagner A (1972) A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: varia- tions in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement, Vol 2: Current research and theory. (pp. 64 -69) New York, NY: Appleton- CenturyCrofts, 1972.

Authors
Vu, M.-A. T., Adalı, T., Ba, D., Buzsáki, G., Carlson, D., Heller, K., Liston, C., Rudin, C., Sohal, V. S., Widge, A. S., Mayberg, H. S., Sapiro, G., & Dzirasa, K.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2018-01-26
Volume
38
Issue
7
Pages
1601-1607
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2785184350
Cited by
191
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 7
FWCI
11.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH099192)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Undergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
data integration, data sharing, BRAIN Initiative, Human Connectome Project, Research Domain Criteria, brain function, multilevel analysis
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Big Data, Animals, Brain, Humans, Neurosciences, Reproducibility of Results, Information Dissemination, Connectome

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