Why the simplest explanation isn't always the best

Molecular causality in the advent of foundation models

Correlation is not causation: this simple and uncontroversial statement has far-reaching implications. Defining and applying causality in biomedical research has posed significant challenges to the scientific community. In this perspective, we attempt to connect the partly disparate fields of systems biology, causal reasoning, and machine learning to inform future approaches in the field of systems biology and molecular medicine.

Assistive sensory-motor perturbations influence learned neural representations

Task errors are used to learn and refine motor skills. We investigated how task assistance influences learned neural representations using Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs), which map neural activity into movement via a decoder. We analyzed motor cortex activity as monkeys practiced BCI with a decoder that adapted to improve or maintain performance over days. Population dimensionality remained constant or increased with learning, counter to trends with non-adaptive BCIs. Yet, over time, task information was contained in a smaller subset of neurons or population modes. Moreover, task information was ultimately stored in neural modes that occupied a small fraction of the population variance. An artificial neural network model suggests the adaptive decoders contribute to forming these compact neural representations. Our findings show that assistive decoders manipulate error information used for long-term learning computations, like credit assignment, which informs our understanding of motor learning and has implications for designing real-world BCIs.

Brain-phenotype predictions can survive across diverse real-world data

Recent work suggests that machine learning models predicting psychiatric treatment outcomes based on clinical data may fail when applied to unharmonized samples. Neuroimaging predictive models offer the opportunity to incorporate neurobiological information, which may be more robust to dataset shifts. Yet, among the minority of neuroimaging studies that undertake any form of external validation, there is a notable lack of attention to generalization across dataset-specific idiosyncrasies. Research settings, by design, remove the between-site variations that real-world and, eventually, clinical applications demand. Here, we rigorously test the ability of a range of predictive models to generalize across three diverse, unharmonized samples: the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort (n=1291), the Healthy Brain Network (n=1110), and the Human Connectome Project in Development (n=428). These datasets have high inter-dataset heterogeneity, encompassing substantial variations in age distribution, sex, racial and ethnic minority representation, recruitment geography, clinical symptom burdens, fMRI tasks, sequences, and behavioral measures. We demonstrate that reproducible and generalizable brain-behavior associations can be realized across diverse dataset features with sample sizes in the hundreds. Results indicate the potential of functional connectivity-based predictive models to be robust despite substantial inter-dataset variability. Notably, for the HCPD and HBN datasets, the best predictions were not from training and testing in the same dataset (i.e., cross-validation) but across datasets. This result suggests that training on diverse data may improve prediction in specific cases. Overall, this work provides a critical foundation for future work evaluating the generalizability of neuroimaging predictive models in real-world scenarios and clinical settings.