Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 97 references

A complex network perspective on brain disease

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes that a brain disease is a network disease when non-trivial network structure relevant to brain function is damaged, with the definition of disease, the definition of function, and the choice of relevant network property…

desk verdict A careful, honest review that frames how disease definitions determine which network properties matter, but the key 'network disease' definition is unfalsifiable as stated — a known limitation, not a hidden flaw. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.23678 v1 pith:VJM4R3DH submitted 2025-07-31 q-bio.NC physics.app-ph

David Papo , Javier M. Buldú This is my paper
classification q-bio.NCphysics.app-ph
keywords complexnetworksbraindiseasenetworkpathoconnectomicsresiliencevulnerabilitydegeneracyneuroscience
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that at least some brain disorders are best understood as network diseases: conditions in which the brain's non-trivial relational structure is what gets damaged, and that damage produces functional impairment. It contends that deciding whether a pathology counts as a network disease is not purely empirical, because the answer depends on how disease and function are defined, and those definitions determine which network property is functionally relevant. If this framing holds, maps of abnormal brain networks (pathoconnectomics) could serve as biomarkers for disease, predict vulnerability and recovery, and guide network-based interventions. The paper also notes that demonstrating genuine network diseases would be evidence that the brain genuinely behaves as a complex network rather than merely being represented as one.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the complex-network representation of the brain: a graph whose nodes are brain regions, states, genes, or proteins and whose links are anatomical, dynamical, or functional relations. On top of this the paper places a three-way dependency among disease definition, function definition, and the network property judged relevant, plus two auxiliary structures: equivalence classes and neutral networks, which are sets of configurations that map to the same function, and the stress-strain metaphor for resilience, with an elastic range, yield point, and ultimate tensile strength. These machinery pieces translate vague notions like vulnerability, cognitive reserve, and reorganization into statements about which network properties are preserved, bent, or broken.

What would settle it

Take a disorder the paper classifies as a network disease, such as Alzheimer's or schizophrenia, and test in a computational model whether the characteristic spatiotemporal pattern of atrophy and functional impairment is reproduced by damaging the identified network property on the human connectome, while a degree-matched randomized network fails to reproduce it. If the randomized network reproduces the disease just as well, the network structure is not doing the causal work and the network-disease claim for that disorder would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central proposal is a definition: a network disease is a condition where non-trivial network structure relevant to brain function is damaged. The paper does not attempt to characterize the network structure of any single pathology; instead, it builds a general framework in which disease can be an ontological perturbation of an intact structure, a dynamical regime reached under certain parameters, or a process unfolding on a network. The way disease is conceived is tied to the way brain function is conceived, and that pair of choices fixes which network property, anatomical or dynamical, topological or geometric, local or global, is the functionally relevant one. From there the paper derives a taxonomy of brain diseases by how they damage network structure, and organizes vulnerability, cognitive reserve, and recovery through a material-science metaphor of elastic resilience, plastic reorganization, and structural failure. It concludes that current network measures are not yet clinically specific enough, but pathoconnectomics could become a clinical tool if the network-disease framing holds.

Load-bearing premise

The framework rests on the assumption that the brain genuinely has non-trivial network structure that is functionally relevant, because if that structure is only a convenient way to draw anatomy and activity, the network-disease ontology collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the network-disease definition is adopted, disorders can be classified by what they damage: nodes versus links, anatomy versus dynamics, topology versus geometry, and local versus non-local consequences.
  • Abnormal connectome maps, called pathoconnectomics, could become biomarkers that detect disease before behavioral symptoms, gauge severity, and define patient theratypes separating therapy responders from non-responders.
  • Vulnerability and recovery become measurable network properties, so cognitive reserve and symptom onset can be studied as extension of the elastic range of a networked system.
  • If network structure is essential to both function and dysfunction, it could be acted upon through network control, targeted stimulation, seizure-network surgery, or microscopic interventions that keep the system in a healthy regime.
  • Demonstrating at least one genuine network disease would support the broader claim that the brain genuinely behaves as a complex network and not merely that network language is a convenient description.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the three-way dependency is correct, contradictory findings in network neuroscience about which metric matters for a disorder may trace back to implicit disagreements about what counts as function; comparing classifications under different function definitions would test this directly.
  • The stress-strain metaphor suggests a testable prediction: disease progression should show an elastic regime where network properties recover, then plastic reorganization to equifunctional structures, then failure marked by critical slowing down, eigenvector localization, and decreased topological dimension, patterns already known from hierarchical materials.
  • The neutral-network view of cognitive reserve implies that interventions aimed at increasing redundancy or degeneracy, such as training or cognitive enrichment, should expand the neutral space and delay symptom onset, which could be tested by measuring network redundancy before and after such interventions.
  • If pathoconnectomics becomes a biomarker, the same framework implies that treatment efficacy should be evaluated by whether the network property identified as functionally relevant returns toward the healthy range, not just by symptom scores.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper is a conceptual review/discussion of how complex network representations can be applied to brain disease. The authors distinguish anatomical, dynamical, and functional network structure, propose that 'network diseases' be defined as conditions in which non-trivial network structure relevant to brain function is damaged, and use this definition to organize a taxonomy of pathologies (local vs. non-local, anatomical vs. dynamical), a discussion of resilience (elastic/plastic regimes, cognitive reserve, reorganisation), and a clinical outlook (pathoconnectomics, control-based interventions). The paper is heavily referenced and explicitly acknowledges open questions about whether the brain's network structure is genuinely functional. It contains no new data or quantitative analysis; its contribution is an organizing framework.

Significance. If the framework were made testable, it would be a useful conceptual resource for network neuroscience and for translational research: it systematically connects definitions of disease, function, and network structure, raises the important question of when a network metric change is functionally relevant, and makes the modest but defensible point that 'networkness' should be treated as graded and disease-dependent rather than all-or-nothing. The paper's strengths are its breadth, its explicit caveats, and its careful distinction between structure, dynamics, and function. However, the central definition is currently unfalsifiable, and the paper's own admissions (Secs. 3.4 and 4.2) undermine the 'relevant to brain function' clause. The significance is therefore conditional on the authors adding operational criteria or reframing the thesis as a hypothesis.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.1] Section 3.1 defines a network disease as a condition where non-trivial network structure relevant to brain function is damaged. The phrase 'relevant to brain function' is never given an operational criterion. Section 3.4 then states that topological, geometric or combinatorial equivalence does not necessarily entail functional equivalence, and Section 4.2 concedes that altered network properties in a disease do not per se guarantee that it is a genuine network disease. Taken together, these passages make the central definition unfalsifiable: any network metric change could be declared functionally relevant or not without a test. I recommend replacing the definition with a falsifiable version, for example by specifying an intervention or prediction (e.g., lesioning the structure should reproduce the disease phenotype, or network-based biomarkers must outperform non-network features in prospective classification), or by explicitly re-labelling it as a working hypothesis with stated disconfirming conditions.
  2. [Secs. 4.1 and 7] The clinical program in Sections 4.1 and 7 rests on pathoconnectomics as a biomarker, but the paper gives no account of how 'functionally relevant' structure is identified. Section 4.1 itself notes that defining links in dynamical networks is complicated because no connectivity metric is explicitly based on neurophysiology. Without a method to establish which structural properties are functionally relevant, the claim that network properties characterize pathology is indistinguishable from an epiphenomenal description. The manuscript would be strengthened by a dedicated subsection with concrete proposals for establishing structure-to-function links, such as perturbation experiments, controllability analyses, or lesion-behavior mapping in patient cohorts.
  3. [Secs. 6.2 and 6.4.2] Section 6.2 introduces the solid-material metaphor (yield point, ultimate tensile strength, toughness) without any formal link to brain network properties. The metaphor is used to organize Sections 6.3–6.5, but the mapping is asserted rather than derived; for example, 'elastic range width' in Sec. 6.4.2 is identified with cognitive reserve without a quantitative definition. As it stands, this is more analogy than framework, and it supports the central thesis only rhetorically. Please state explicitly what mathematical objects correspond to stress, strain, and yield, or demote the metaphor to an illustrative device.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract says 'We show how the way disease is defined is related to the way function is defined,' but the paper argues and illustrates rather than formally shows; 'we argue' or 'we propose' would be more accurate.
  2. [Sec. 2.1] The lengthy etymological discussion of disease-related terms, while interesting, is not used to derive any of the later definitions or distinctions; consider condensing it to one short paragraph.
  3. [Sec. 3.2] The statement that some systems 'may not' meaningfully be equipped with a network structure (e.g., purely feedforward systems) is presented without a citation or example; this claim deserves support.
  4. [Sec. 6.6.2] The concept of 'microscopic interventions' is introduced with references but its difference from the earlier 'control strategies' is not explained until the end of the section; clarify earlier.
  5. [References] Several references are incomplete or listed as in press (e.g., Papo and Buldú, 2024b; Buldú et al., 2024); these need to be completed before publication.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a self-flagged conceptual proposal, not a derivation from fitted inputs or self-cited theorems.

full rationale

This is a perspective/review paper, so the usual circularity patterns (fitting a parameter and then predicting it, or invoking an author-imported uniqueness theorem) do not apply. The central definition is explicitly introduced as a proposal rather than as a derived result: 'we propose that a network disease is a condition where non-trivial network structure relevant to brain function is damaged' (Section 3.1). The paper does not use this definition as evidence for network relevance; it repeatedly flags the premise as open, stating that 'Whether the brain actually behaves as a complex network or else such a structure merely constitutes a convenient representation is a fundamental yet still poorly understood question' (Section 1), and it guards against the main self-confirming inference by conceding that observing altered network properties in a disease 'does not per se guarantee that the former is a genuine network disease' (Section 4.2) and that 'a system has a given structure does not entail that such a structure is functional' (Section 3.4). The self-citations that appear (e.g. Papo and Buldú 2024, 2025; Papo 2019a; Buldú et al. 2024) are used to name concepts or point to prior reviews, not to supply a load-bearing theorem that forces the conclusion. The paper's acknowledged limitations about functional relevance are epistemic weaknesses, not circular reductions. No specific equation or derivation step can be exhibited as equivalent to its own input, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central framework rests on four domain assumptions. None are new entities, and no free parameters are fitted. The review does not introduce a new physical or dynamical entity; 'network disease' and 'pathoconnectomics' are conceptual categories rather than invented entities with independent empirical handles.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Brain anatomy and dynamics possess genuine, functionally relevant complex network structure.
    Invoked throughout; explicitly flagged as unresolved in Section 1: 'Whether the brain actually behaves as a complex network or else such a structure merely constitutes a convenient representation is a fundamental yet still poorly understood question.'
  • domain assumption Disease can be represented as a perturbation or alteration of network structure.
    Section 6.3: 'Disease can then be thought of as a perturbation acting upon the network structure of a multi-body dynamical system'; also Section 4 treats disease as 'healthy network structure alteration.'
  • domain assumption Network equivalence classes correspond to functional equivalence classes.
    Section 3.4 and 3.5: the paper assumes that network-related equivalence classes would define functional equivalence classes, while acknowledging that the converse is not established.
  • ad hoc to paper Resilience concepts from material science map onto brain network behavior.
    Section 6.2 introduces the solid material metaphor (yield point, ultimate tensile strength, toughness) and applies it to brain networks without empirical calibration.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A complex network perspective on brain disease." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VJM4R3DH

@misc{pith2026250723678,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A complex network perspective on brain disease},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VJM4R3DH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.23678}
}
read the original abstract

If brain anatomy and dynamics have a genuine complex network structure as it has become standard to posit, it is also reasonable to assume that such a structure should play a key role not only in brain function but also in brain dysfunction. However, exactly how network structure is implicated in brain damage and whether at least some pathologies can be thought of as "network diseases" is not entirely clear. Here we discuss ways in which a complex network representation can help characterising brain pathology, but also subjects' vulnerability to and likelihood of recovery from disease. We show how the way disease is defined is related to the way function is defined and this, in turn, determines which network property may be functionally relevant to brain disease. Thus, addressing brain disease "networkness" may shed light not only on brain pathology, with potential clinical implications, but also on functional brain activity, and what is functional in it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.23678 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Functional brain activity should not be equated with bare brain dynamics. Functional brain activity results from a complex projections  and its inverse  from the structure  of the neurophysiological space A to the structure  defined on the abstract space B of cognitive functions made observable by some set of performance measures. Ultimately, parcellation in one space is used to define parcellations in the oth… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Functional brain activity can be thought of as the fitness landscape corresponding to a given network structure phenotype. In turn, the phenotype space of network structures emerges from the renormalization of underlying space of physiological activity. Neutral structure can be defined at both genotype and phenotype level. The functional space’s morphology depends on the properties of both the genotype-to-phenotype … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abdelnour, F., Mueller, S., and Raj, A. (2015). Rel ating cortical atrophy in temporal lobe epilepsy with graph diffusion-based network models. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11 , e1004564. Abdelnour, F., Voss, H.U., and Raj, A. (2014). Netw ork diffusion accurately models the relationship between structural and functional brain connectivity networks. Neuroimage 90 ,...

    2015

  2. [2]

    Lesne, A. (2008). Robustness: confronting lessons f rom physics and biology. Biol. Rev. 83 , 509–532. Levina, A., Herrmann, J.M., and Geisel, T. (2007). Dynamical synapses causing self- organized criticality in neural networks. Nat. Phys. 3, 857–860. Levit-Binnun, N., and Golland, Y. (2012). Finding behavioral and network indicators of brain vulnerability...

    work page 2008

  3. [5]

    Wang, L., Yu, C., Chen, H., Qin, W., He, Y., Fan, F., Zhang, Y., Wang, M., Li, K., Zang, Y., and Woodward, T.S. (2010). Dynamic functional reorg anization of the motor execution network after stroke. Brain 133 , 1224–1238. Wang, W., Li, W., Lin, T., Wu, T., Pan, L., and Liu, Y. (2022). Generalized k-core percolation on higher-order dependent networks. App...

    work page 2010

  4. [10]

    Liang, J., Yang, Z., and Zhou, C. (2024). Excitation–inhibition balance, neural criticality, and activities in neuronal circuits. Neuroscientist 10738584231221766. Liddle, P.F., and Morris, D.L. (1991). Schizophreni c syndromes and frontal lobe performance. Br. J. Psychiatry 158 , 340–345. Lienkaemper, C., Shiu, A., and Woodstock, Z. (2017) . Obstructions...

    work page 2024

  5. [11]

    Raj, A., Kuceyeski, A., and Weiner, M. (2012). A ne twork diffusion model of disease progression in dementia. Neuron 73 , 1204 −

    work page 2012

  6. [12]

    Wilkat, T., Rings, T., and Lehnertz, K. (2019). No evidence for critical slowing down prior to human epileptic seizures. Chaos 29 , 091104. Wilson, R.S., Yu, L., Lamar, M., Schneider, J.A., B oyle, P.A., and Bennett, D.A. (2019). Education and cognitive reserve in old age. Neurology 92 , e1041–e1050. Witthaut, D., Rohden, M., Zhang, X., Hallerberg, S. , a...

    work page 2019

  7. [15]

    Hansen, J.Y., Shafiei, G., Markello, R.D., Smart, K ., Cox, S.M., Nørgaard, M., Beliveau, V., Wu, Y., Gallezot, J.D., Aumont, É., and Servaes, S. (2022). Mapping neurotransmitter systems to the structural and functional organizati on of the human neocortex. Nat. Neurosci. 25 , 1569–1581. Hasan, M.Z., and Kane, C.L. (2010). Colloquium: top ological insulat...

    work page 2022

  8. [22]

    Saxena, S., and Caroni, P. (2011). Selective neurona l vulnerability in neurodegenerative diseases: from stressor thresholds to degeneration. Neuron 71 , 35–48. Scharfman, H.E., Sollas, A.L., Berger, R.E., and Goodman, J.H. (2003). Electrophysiological evidence of monosynaptic excitatory transmission bet ween granule cells after seizure- induced mossy fib...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

Show all 97 references
  1. [23]

    Hopfield, J.J. (1974). Kinetic proofreading: a new mechanism for reducing errors in biosynthetic processes requiring high specificity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 71 , 4135–

    1974

  2. [35]

    Flanagan, R., Lacasa, L., Towlson, E.K., Lee, S.H., and Porter, M.A. (2019). Effect of antipsychotics on community structure in functional brain networks. J. Complex Netw. 7, 932–960. Foffani, G., and Obeso, J.A. (2018). A cortical pat hogenic theory of Parkinson’s disease. Ne...

    2019

  3. [40]

    22 Gao, P., and Ganguli, S. (2015). On simplicity and complexity in the brave new world of large-scale neuroscience. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 32 , 148–155. Garlaschelli, D., Ruzzenenti, F., and Basosi, R. (2 010). Complex networks and symmetry I: a review. Symmetry 2, 1683–1709....

    2015 arXiv

  4. [47]

    Albert, R., Jeong, H., and Barabási, A.L. (2000). E rror and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406 , 378–382. Alexander-Bloch, A.F., Gogtay, N., Meunier, D., Bir n, R., Clasen, L., Lalonde, F., Lenroot, R., Giedd, J., and Bullmore, E.T. (2010). Disrupted modularity ...

    2000

  5. [50]

    Radicchi, F., and Arenas, A. (2013). Abrupt transit ion in the structural formation of interconnected networks. Nat. Phys. 9, 717 −

    2013

  6. [53]

    Tanaka, G., Morino, K., Daido, H., and Aihara, K. (2014). Dynamical robustness of coupled heterogeneous oscillators. Phys. Rev. E 89 , 052906. Teller, S., Estévez-Priego, E., Granell, C., Tornero, D., Andilla, J., Olarte, O.E., Loza-Alvarez, P., Arenas, A., and Soriano, J. (20...

    2014

  7. [55]

    Moretti, P., and Zaiser, M. (2019). Network analysi s predicts failure of materials and structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116 , 16666–16668. 24 Morrell, F., Whisler, W.W., and Bleck, T.P. (1989). Multiple subpial transection: a new approach to the surgical treatment of...

    2019

  8. [72]

    Perra, N., Baronchelli, A., Mocanu, D., Gonçalves, B., Pastor-Satorras, R., and Vespignani, A. (2012). Random walks and search in time-varying networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 , 238701. Peters, J.F. (2016). Computational proximity . Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol

    2012

  9. [78]

    Stadler, P.F., and Stadler, B.M. (2006). Genotype-phenotype maps. Biol. Theory 1, 268–279. Stam, C.J. (2014). Modern network science of neurol ogical disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 15 , 683 −

    2006

  10. [86]

    Papo, D., and Buldú, J.M. (2024). Does the brain be have like a (complex) network? I. Dynamics. Phys. Life Rev. 48 , 47–98. Papo, D., and Buldú, J.M. (2025). Does the brain be have like a (complex) network? II. Function. (in preparation ). Papo, D., Zanin, M., Pineda, J.A., Bo...

    2024

  11. [91]

    (2004 a)

    Kitano, H. (2004 a). Biological robustness. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 826–837. Kitano, H. (2004b). Cancer as a robust system: implications for anticancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 4, 227–235. Kitano, H. (2007). Towards a theory of biological robustness. Mol. Syst. Biol. 3,

    2004

  12. [97]

    topological shape of ageing

    Frith, C.D. (1992). The cognitive neuropsychology of schizophrenia . Psychology press. Fülöp, T., Desroches, M., Cohen, A.A., Santos, F.A. N., and Rodrigues, S. (2020). Why we should use topological data analysis in ageing: tow ards defining the “topological shape of ageing”. ...

    1992

  13. [100]

    Wagner, A. (2012). The role of robustness in phenotypic adaptation and innovation. Proc. R. Soc. B 279 , 1249–1258. Walker, B., Holling, C.S., Carpenter, S.R., and Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 9,

    2012

  14. [102]

    Peters, J.F

    Springer, Cham. Peters, J.F. (2018). Proximal fiber bundles on nerve complexes. In: Mathematical Analysis and Applications: Selected Topics , (Ruzhansky, M., Dutta, H., & Agarwal, R. P. Eds.). pp. 517–536. Petri, G., Musslick, S., Dey, B., Özcimder, K., Tur ner, D., Ahmed, N.K...

    2018

  15. [103]

    Machta, B.B., Chachra, R., Transtrum, M.K., and Set hna, J.P. (2013). Parameter space compression underlies emergent theories and predictive models. Science 342 , 604–607. McIntosh, A.R., and Jirsa, V.K. (2019). The hidden repertoire of brain dynamics and dysfunction. Netw. Ne...

    2013

  16. [122]

    Ratté, S., and Prescott, S.A. (2016). Afferent hype rexcitability in neuropathic pain and the inconvenient truth about its degeneracy. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 36 , 31–37. Recanatesi, S., Pereira-Obilinovic, U., Murakami, M., Mainen, Z., and Mazzucato, L. (2022). Metastable attr...

    2016

  17. [137]

    Koetter, R., Effros, M., and Médard, M. (2011). A t heory of network equivalence — Part I: Point-to-point channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 57 , 972–995. Koetter, R., and Médard, M. (2003). An algebraic approach to network coding. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 11 , 782–795. Korhonen, ...

    2011

  18. [147]

    Alivisatos, A.P., Chun, M., Church, G.M., Deisserot h, K., Donoghue, J.P., Greenspan, R.J., McEuen, P.L., Roukes, M.L., Sejnowski, T.J., Weiss, P.S., and Yuste, R. (2013). The brain activity map. Science 339 , 1284–1285. Alivisatos, A.P., Chun, M., Church, G.M., Greenspan , R....

    2013

  19. [149]

    Preserved structura l network organization mediates pathology spread in Alzheimer’s disease spectrum de spite loss of white matter tract integrity

    Powell, F., Tosun, D., Sadeghi, R., Weiner, M., Raj , A., and Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (2018). Preserved structura l network organization mediates pathology spread in Alzheimer’s disease spectrum de spite loss of white matter tract integrity. J. Alzheimers D...

    2018

  20. [159]

    Fornito, A., Zalesky, A., Pantelis, C., and Bullmor e, E.T. (2012). Schizophrenia, neuroimaging and connectomics. Neuroimage 62 , 2296–2314. Fries, P. (2005). A mechanism for cognitive dynamic s: neuronal communication through neuronal coherence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 474–480. ...

    2012

  21. [184]

    Cabral, J., Hugues, E., Sporns, O., and Deco, G. (2011). Role of local network oscillations in resting-state functional connectivity. Neuroimage 57 , 130–139. Calhoun, V.D., Miller, R., Pearlson, G., and Adalı, T. (2014). The chronnectome: time- varying connectivity networks a...

    2011

  22. [186]

    Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., and Fried, E.I. (2018). Estimating psychological networks and their accuracy: A tutorial paper. Behav. Res. 50 , 195–212. Erickson, M.J. (2014). Introduction to combinatorics . Discrete Mathematics and Optimization. Vol. 78 (2 nd ed.). John Wiley & S...

    2018

  23. [189]

    Bowick, M.J., Fakhri, N., Marchetti, M.C., and Rama swamy, S. (2022). Symmetry, thermodynamics, and topology in active matter. Phys. Rev. X 12 , 010501. Braak, H., Del Tredici, K., Rüb, U., De Vos, R.A., Steur, E.N.J., and Braak, E. (2003). Staging of brain pathology related t...

    2022

  24. [200]

    Millán, A.P., Torres, J.J., and Bianconi, G. (2018). Complex network geometry and frustrated synchronization. Sci. Rep. 8,

    2018

  25. [208]

    Alstott, J., Breakspear, M., Hagmann, P., Cammoun, L., and Sporns, O. (2009). Modeling the impact of lesions in the human brain. PLoS Comput. Biol. 5, e1000408. Altenberg, L. (1995). The schema theorem and Price' s theorem. In Foundations of genetic algorithms (Vol. 3, pp. 23 ...

    2009

  26. [217]

    Roth, D.M., and Balch, W.E. (2011). Modeling genera l proteostasis: proteome balance in health and disease. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 23 , 126–134. Rubinov, M., and Bullmore, E. (2013). Fledgling pathoconnectomics of psychiatric disorders. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 , 641 −

    2011

  27. [222]

    (2019 b)

    Papo, D. (2019 b). Neurofeedback: principles, appraisal and outstan ding issues. Eur. J. Neurosci. 49 , 1454–1469. Papo, D. (2013 b). Time scales in cognitive neuroscience. Front. Physiol. 4,

    2019

  28. [224]

    Martinello, M., Hidalgo, J., Maritan, A., Di Santo, S., Plenz, D., and Muñoz, M.A. (2017). Neutral theory and scale-free neural dynamics. Phys. Rev. X 7, 041071. Martínez, J.H., Buldú, J.M., Papo, D., Fallani, F.D.V., and Chavez, M. (2018a). Role of inter- hemispheric connecti...

    2017

  29. [232]

    Tanaka, G., Morino, K., and Aihara, K. (2015). Dynamical robustness of complex biological networks. Mathematical approaches to biological systems: netw orks, oscillations, and collective motions , pp. 29 −

    2015

  30. [252]

    Vattikuti, S., and Chow, C.C. (2010). A computational model for cerebral cortical dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders. Biol. Psychiatry. 67 , 672–678. Verstraete, E., Veldink, J.H., Mandl, R.C., van den Berg, L.H., van den Heuvel, M.P. (2011). Impaired structural motor co...

    2010

  31. [274]

    Canguilhem, G. (1966). Le normal et le pathologique . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Caprioglio, E., and Berthouze, L. (2024). Emergence of metastability in frustrated oscillatory networks: the key role of hierarchical modularity. Front. Netw. Physiol. 4, 1436046. Ca...

    1966

  32. [307]

    De Arcangelis, L., Perrone-Capano, C., and Herrmann, H.J. (2006). Self-organized criticality model for brain plasticity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 , 028107. DeDeo, S., and Krakauer, D.C. (2012). Dynamics and processing in finite self-similar networks. J. R. Soc. Interface 9, 2131–21...

    2006

  33. [341]

    Lalande, A. (1927). Vocabulaire technique et critique de la philosophie , revu par MM. les membres et correspondants de la Société française de philos ophie et publié, avec leurs corrections et observations par André Lalande, membre de l'Inst itut, professeur à la Sorbonne, se...

    1927

  34. [342]

    Chiang, S., and Haneef, Z. (2014). Graph theory findings in the pathophysiology of temporal lobe epilepsy. Clin. Neurophysiol. 125 , 1295–1305. Clark, D.G., and Abbott, L.F. (2024). Theory of cou pled neuronal-synaptic dynamics. Phys. Rev. X 14 , 021001. Clavaguera, F., Hench,...

    2014

  35. [352]

    Baxter, G.J., Dorogovtsev, S.N., Goltsev, A.V., and Mendes, J.F.F. (2012). Avalanche collapse of interdependent networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 , 248701. Baxter, G.J., Dorogovtsev, S.N., Lee, K.E., Mendes, J.F.F., and Goltsev, A.V. (2015). Critical dynamics of the k-core prunin...

    2012

  36. [396]

    Hahamy, A., Behrmann, M., and Malach, R. (2015). Th e idiosyncratic brain: distortion of spontaneous connectivity patterns in autism spectrum disorder. Nat. Neurosci. 18 , 302–309. Hallett, M. (2005). Neuroplasticity and rehabilitation. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 42 , R17. Halu, A....

    2015

  37. [405]

    Tijms, B.M., Wink, A.M., De Haan, W., van der Flier , W.M., Stam, C.J., Scheltens, P., and Barkhof, F. (2013). Alzheimer's disease: connecting findings from graph theoretical studies of brain networks. Neurobiol. Aging 34 , 2023–2036. Timme, M. (2006). Does dynamics reflect to...

    2013

  38. [450]

    Csete, M., and Doyle, J. (2002). Reverse engineerin g of biological complexity. Science 295 , 1664–1669. Curto, C. (2017). What can topology tell us about t he neural code? Bull. New. Ser. Am. Math. Soc. 54 , 63–78. Curto, C., Geneson, J., and Morrison, K. (2019). Fixed points...

    2002

  39. [484]

    Kálmán, R.E. (1963). Mathematical description of linear dynamical systems. J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. Ser. A 1, 152–192. Kaneko, K. (2007). Evolution of robustness to noise and mutation in gene expression dynamics. PLoS One 2, e434. Kashtan, N., and Alon, U. (2005). Spontaneous ...

    1963

  40. [509]

    Papo, D. (2015). How can we study reasoning in the brain? Front.Hum. Neurosci. 9,

    2015

  41. [613]

    G., Papo, D., Sousa, P., Menasalvas, E., and Boccaletti, S

    Zanin, M., Alcazar, J.M., Carbajosa, J.V., Paez, M. G., Papo, D., Sousa, P., Menasalvas, E., and Boccaletti, S. (2014). Parenclitic networks: uncovering new functions in biological data. Sci. Rep. 4,

    2014

  42. [647]

    Rubinov, M., Sporns, O., Thivierge, J.P., and Break spear, M. (2011). Neurobiologically realistic determinants of self-organized criticalit y in networks of spiking neurons. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1002038. Rubenstein, J.L.R., and Merzenich, M.M. (2003). Mod el of autism: incre...

    2011

  43. [677]

    Ott, E., Grebogi, C., and Yorke, J.A. (1990). Controlling chaos. Phys. Rev. Lett. 64 ,1196. Panas, D., Amin, H., Maccione, A., Muthmann, O., va n Rossum, M., Berdondini, L., and Hennig, M.H. (2015). Sloppiness in spontaneously ac tive neuronal networks. J. Neurosci. 35 , 8480-...

    1990

  44. [681]

    Barzel, B., Liu, Y.Y., and Barabási, A.L. (2015). C onstructing minimal models for complex system dynamics. Nat. Commun . 6,

    2015

  45. [694]

    Massimini, M., Corbetta, M., Sanchez-Vives, M.V., A ndrillon, T., Deco, G., Rosanova, M., and Sarasso, S. (2024). Sleep-like cortical dynamic s during wakefulness and their network effects following brain injury. Nat. Commun. 15 ,

    2024

  46. [695]

    Stam, C.J., Tewarie, P., Van Dellen, E., Van Straat en, E.C.W., Hillebrand, A., and Van Mieghem, P. (2014). The trees and the forest: characterization of complex brain networks with minimum spanning trees. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 92 , 129–138. Stanford, W., Mucha, P.J., and Day...

    2014

  47. [701]

    C., Mucha, P.J., and Dayan, E

    Stanford, W. C., Mucha, P.J., and Dayan, E. (2022). A robust core architecture of functional brain networks supports topological resilience and cognitive performance in middle-and old-aged adults. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 119 , e2203682119. Stephan, K.E., Friston, K.J., a...

    2022

  48. [702]

    Bassett, D.S., Khambhati, A.N., and Grafton, S.T. ( 2017). Emerging frontiers of neuroengineering: a network science of brain connectivity. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 19 , 327–

    2017

  49. [720]

    Ramesh, P., Confavreux, B., Gonçalves, P.J., Vogels , T.P., and Macke, J.H. (2023). Indistinguishable network dynamics can emerge from unalike plasticity rules. bioRxiv 2023-

    2023

  50. [722]

    Kuceyeski, A., Zhang, Y., Raj, A. (2012). Linking w hite matter integrity loss to associated cortical regions using structural connectivity info rmation in Alzheimer’s disease and fronto-temporal dementia: the Loss in Connectivity (LoCo) score. Neuroimage 61 , 1311–

    2012

  51. [764]

    Pozo, K., and Goda, Y. (2010). Unraveling mechanism s of homeostatic synaptic plasticity. Neuron 66 , 337–351. Price, C.J., and Friston, K.J. (2002). Degeneracy a nd cognitive anatomy. Trends Cognit. Sci. 6, 416–421. Rabinovich, M., Huerta, R., and Laurent, G. (2008). Transien...

    2010

  52. [792]

    van Diessen, E., Diederen, S.J., Braun, K.P., Jansen, F.E., and Stam, C. J. (2013). Functional and structural brain networks in epilepsy: what have we learned?. Epilepsia 54 , 1855 −

    2013

  53. [797]

    Rapisardi, G., Kryven, I., and Arenas, A. (2022). P ercolation in networks with local homeostatic plasticity. Nat. Commun. 13 ,

    2022

  54. [896]

    Tsuda, I. (2001). Toward an interpretation of dynam ic neural activity in terms of chaotic dynamical systems. Behav. Brain Sci. 24 , 793–810. Tyloo, M., Coletta, T., and Jacquod, P. (2018). Robustness of synchrony in complex networks and generalized Kirchhoff indices. Phys. Re...

    2001

  55. [905]

    Hulkower, M.B., Poliak, D.B., Rosenbaum, S.B., Zimmerman, M.E., and Lipton, M.L. (2013). A decade of DTI in traumatic brain injury: 10 years and 100 articles later. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 34 , 2064–2074. Ibañez-Marcelo, E., and Alarcon, T. (2014). The top ology of robustness and ...

    2013

  56. [1056]

    25 Roberts, J.A., Perry, A., Lord, A.R., Roberts, G., Mitchell, P.B., Smith, R.E., Calamante, F., and Breakspear, M. (2016). The contribution of geom etry to the human connectome. Neuroimage 124 , 379–393. Rocca, M.A., and Filippi, M. (2017). Functional reo rganization is a ma...

    2016

  57. [1132]

    Aerts, H., Fias, W., Caeyenberghs, K., and Marinazzo, D. (2016). Brain networks under attack: robustness properties and the impact of lesions. Brain 139 , 3063–3083. Agache, I., and Akdis, C.A. (2019). Precision medic ine and phenotypes, endotypes, genotypes, regiotypes, and t...

    2016

  58. [1215]

    Raj, A., and Powell, F. (2018). Models of network spread and network degeneration in brain disorders. Biol Psychiatry Cogn. Neurosci. Neuroimaging 3, 788 −

    2018

  59. [1275]

    Dorogovtsev, S.N., Goltsev, A.V., and Mendes, J.F.F . (2006). k-Core organization of complex networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 , 040601. Douw, L., van Dellen, E., Gouw, A.A., Griffa, A., d e Haan, W., van den Heuvel, M., Hillebrand, A., Van Mieghem, P., Nissen, I.A., Otte, W.M., a...

    2006

  60. [1323]

    Lahav, N., Ksherim, B., Ben-Simon, E., Maron-Katz, A., Cohen, R., and Havlin, S. (2016). K-shell decomposition reveals hierarchical cortical organization of the human brain. New J. Phys. 18 , 083013. Lai, Y.C. (2014). Controlling complex, non- linear dynamical networks. Natl. ...

    2016

  61. [1412]

    Casanova, M., and Trippe, J. (2009). Radial cytoarc hitecture and patterns of cortical connectivity in autism. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364 , 1433–1436. Castellanos, F.X., Di Martino, A., Craddock, R.C., Mehta, A.D., and Milham, M.P. (2013). Clinical applications of the function...

    2009

  62. [1594]

    Stadler, B.M.R., Stadler, P.F., Wagner, G.P., and F ontana, W. (2001). The topology of the possible: formal spaces underlying patterns of evolutionary change. J. Theor. Biol. 213 , 241–

    2001

  63. [1674]

    Jirsa, V.K., Proix, T., Perdikis, D., Woodman, M.M., Wang, H., Gonzalez-Martinez, J., Bernard, C., Bénar, C., Guye, M., Chauvel, P., and Bartolomei, F. (2017). The virtual epileptic patient: individualized whole-brain model s of epilepsy spread. Neuroimage 145 , 377–388. Jirsa...

    2017

  64. [1744]

    (2019 b)

    Rings, T., von Wrede, R., and Lehnertz, K. (2019 b). Precursors of seizures due to specific spatial-temporal modifications of evolving large-scale epileptic brain networks. Sci. Rep. 9, 10623. Roberts, J.A., Gollo, L.L., Abeysuriya, R.G., Rober ts, G., Mitchell, P.B., Woolrich...

    2019

  65. [1865]

    Van Essen, D.C., Smith, S.M., Barch, D.M., Behrens, T.E., Yacoub, E., Ugurbil, K., and Wu- Minn HCP Consortium. (2013). The WU-Minn human connectome project: an overview. Neuroimage 80 , 62–79. Van Essen, D.C., Ugurbil, K., Auerbach, E., Barch, D., Behrens, T.E., Bucholz, R., ...

    2013

  66. [1942]

    Corominas-Murtra, B., Goñi, J., Solé, R.V., and Rod ríguez-Caso, C. (2013). On the origins of hierarchy in complex networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110 , 13316–13321. Cristino, A.S., Williams, S.M., Hawi, Z., An, J.Y., Bellgrove, M.A., Schwartz, C.E., Costa, L.D.F., and...

    2013

  67. [2002]

    Epilepsia 43 , 219–227

    Neural networks in human epile psy: evidence of and implications for treatment. Epilepsia 43 , 219–227. Sreenivasan, S., and Fiete, I. (2011). Grid cells g enerate an analog error-correcting code for singularly precise neural computation. Nat. Neurosci. 14 , 1330–1337. Sreeniv...

    2011

  68. [2385]

    Taleb, N.N. (2012). Antifragile . Random House, New York. Tanaka, G., Morino, K., and Aihara, K. (2012). Dynamical robustness in complex networks: the crucial role of low-degree nodes. Sci. Rep. 2,

    2012

  69. [2521]

    Moretti, P., Renner, J., Safari, A., and Zaiser, M. (2019). Graph theoretical approaches for the characterization of damage in hierarchical materials. Eur. Phys. J. B 92 ,

    2019

  70. [3045]

    and Sharp, D.J

    Hellyer, P.J., Leech, R., Ham, T.E., Bonnelle, V. and Sharp, D.J. (2013). Individual prediction of white matter injury following traumatic brain injury. Ann. Neurol. 73 , 489–499. Henderson, J.A., and Robinson, P.A. (2011). Geometr ic effects on complex network structure in th...

    2013

  71. [4079]

    Penner, I.K., and Aktas, O. (2017). Functional reor ganization is a maladaptive response to injury - NO. Mult. Scler. J. 23 , 193–194. Peraza, L.R., Díaz-Parra, A., Kennion, O., Moratal, D., Taylor, J.P., Kaiser, M., Bauer, R., and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (...

    2017

  72. [4086]

    L., and Griffanti, L., (2016)

    Miller, K.L., Alfaro-Almagro, F., Bangerter, N.K., Thomas, D.L., Yacoub, E., Xu, J., Bartsch, A.J., Jbabdi, S., Sotiropoulos, S.N., Andersson, J. L., and Griffanti, L., (2016). Multimodal population brain imaging in the UK Biobank prospect ive epidemiological study. Nature Neu...

    2016

  73. [4139]

    Howell, B.R., Styner, M.A., Gao, W., Yap, P.T., Wang, L., Baluyot, K., Yacoub, E., Chen, G., Potts, T., Salzwedel, A., and Li, G. (2019). The UN C/UMN Baby Connectome Project (BCP): an overview of the study design and protocol development. Neuroimage 185 , 891–

    2019

  74. [4212]

    Zierenberg, J., Wilting, J., and Priesemann, V. (20 18). Homeostatic plasticity and external input shape neural network dynamics. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031018. Zonca, L., Escrichs, A., Patow, G.A., Manasova, D., Sanz Perl, Y., Annen, J., Gosseries, O., Deco, G., and Sitt, J. (2024)....

    2024

  75. [4336]

    Burns, S.P., Santaniello, S., Yaffe, R.B., Jouny, C .C., Crone, N.E., Bergey, G.K., Anderson, W.S., and Sarma, S.V. (2014). Network dynamics of the brain and influence of the epileptic seizure onset zone. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111 , E5321–E5330. Burrows, D.R., Diana, G...

    2014

  76. [4441]

    Sutula, T.P., Hagen, J., and Pitkänen, A. (2003). Do epileptic seizures damage the brain? Curr. Opin. Neurol. 16 , 189–195. Sydnor, V.J., Larsen, B., Bassett, D.S., Alexander- Bloch, A., Fair, D.A., Liston, C., Mackey, A.P., Milham, M.P., Pines, A., Roalf, D.R., and Sei dlitz,...

    2003

  77. [4937]

    Fisher, L. (2015). More than 70 ways to show resilience. Nature 518 ,

    2015

  78. [5112]

    Zanin, M., Menasalvas, E., Sun, X., and Wandelt, S. (2018). From the difference of structures to the structure of the difference. Complexity 2018 , 4326097. Zañudo, J.G.T., and Albert, R. (2013). An effective network reduction approach to find the dynamical repertoire of discr...

    2018

  79. [5301]

    Barkai, N., and Leibler, S. (1997). Robustness in s imple biochemical networks. Nature 387 , 913–917. Barulli, D., and Stern, Y (2013). Efficiency, capac ity, compensation, maintenance, plasticity: emerging concepts in cognitive reserve. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 , 502–509. Barzel,...

    1997

  80. [5796]

    Kaiser, M. (2013). The potential of the human conne ctome as a biomarker of brain disease. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7,

    2013

  81. [5850]

    Yan, G., Tsekenis, G., Barzel, B., Slotine, J.J., Liu, Y.Y., and Barabási, A.L. (2015). Spectrum of controlling and observing complex networks. Nat. Phys. 11 , 779–786. Yizhar, O., Fenno, L.E., Prigge, M., Schneider, F., Davidson, T.J., O’Shea, D.J., Sohal, V.S., Goshen, I., F...

    2015

  82. [5990]

    Viscomi, M.T., and Molinari, M. (2014). Remote neurodegeneration: multiple actors for one play. Mol. Neurobiol. 50 , 368–389. Wagner, A. (2011). Genotype networks shed light on evolutionary constraints. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 577–583. Wagner, A. (2008 a). Neutralism and select...

    2014

  83. [6339]

    Fornito, A., Zalesky, A., and Breakspear, M. (2015) . The connectomics of brain disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16 ,

    2015

  84. [7186]

    Barzon, G., Artime, O., Suweis, S., and De Domenico, M. (2024). Unraveling the mesoscale organization induced by network-driven processes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 121 , e2317608121. Başar, E. (1999). Brain function and oscillations [v. II]: Integrativ e brain function, n...

    2024

  85. [7207]

    Mastrogiuseppe, F., and Ostojic, S. (2018). Linking connectivity, dynamics, and computations in low-rank recurrent neural networks. Neuron 99 , 609–623. Mattar, M.G., Cole, M.W., Thompson-Schill, S.L., an d Bassett, D.S. (2015). A functional cartography of cognitive systems. P...

    2018

  86. [7751]

    Ganmor, E., Segev, R., and Schneidman, E. (2015). A thesaurus for a neural population code. eLife 4, e06134. Gao, J., Buldyrev, S.V., Havlin, S., and Stanley, H .E. (2011). Robustness of a network of networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 , 195701. Gao, J., Buldyrev, S.V., Stanley, H....

    2015

  87. [8414]

    Guloksuz, S., Pries, L.K., and Van Os, J. (2017). A pplication of network methods for understanding mental disorders: pitfalls and promise. Psychol. Med. 47 , 2743–2752. Gunderson, L.H. (2000). Ecological resilience—in th eory and application. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 31 ,...

    2017

  88. [9195]

    Brundin, P., Melki, R., and Kopito, R. (2010). Prio n-like transmission of protein aggregates in neurodegenerative diseases. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 11 , 301–307. Buckner, R.L. (2004). Memory and executive function in aging and AD: multiple factors that cause decline and re...

    2010

  89. [9910]

    Millán, A.P., van Straaten, E.C., Stam, C.J., Nisse n, I.A., Idema, S., Baayen, J.C., Van Mieghem, P., and Hillebrand, A. (2022). Epidemic mo dels characterize seizure propagation and the effects of epilepsy surgery in individualized brain networks based on MEG and invasive EE...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.