A Shared Vision for Machine Learning in Neuroscience
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
The first mention of XAI in a PubMed title, abstract or keywords was in 2018, in a paper about machine learning in neuroscience.
“Its first mention in a PubMed title, abstract or keywords was in 2018, in a paper about machine learning in neuroscience [11].”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts and Challenges in Healthcare (2023) · cites this paper as [11]
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
- 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)
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2018-01-26
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1601-1607
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC5815449
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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