Graph Analysis and Modularity of Brain Functional Connectivity Networks: Searching for the Optimal Threshold

Neuroimaging data can be represented as networks of nodes and edges that capture the topological organization of the brain connectivity. Graph theory provides a general and powerful framework to study these networks and their structure at various scales. By way of example, community detection methods have been widely applied to investigate the modular structure of many natural networks, including brain functional connectivity networks. Sparsification procedures are often applied to remove the weakest edges, which are the most affected by experimental noise, and to reduce the density of the graph, thus making it theoretically and computationally more tractable. However, weak links may also contain significant structural information, and procedures to identify the optimal tradeoff are the subject of active research. Here, we explore the use of percolation analysis, a method grounded in statistical physics, to identify the optimal sparsification threshold for community detection in brain connectivity networks. By using synthetic networks endowed with a ground-truth modular structure and realistic topological features typical of human brain functional connectivity networks, we show that percolation analysis can be applied to identify the optimal sparsification threshold that maximizes information on the networks' community structure. We validate this approach using three different community detection methods widely applied to the analysis of brain connectivity networks: Newman's modularity, InfoMap and Asymptotical Surprise. Importantly, we test the effects of noise and data variability, which are critical factors to determine the optimal threshold. This data-driven method should prove particularly useful in the analysis of the community structure of brain networks in populations characterized by different connectivity strengths, such as patients and controls.

[1]  Andreas Goerdt The giant component threshold for random regular graphs with edge faults H. Prodinger , 2001, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Olaf Sporns,et al.  Complex network measures of brain connectivity: Uses and interpretations , 2010, NeuroImage.

[3]  G. Cecchi,et al.  Scale-free brain functional networks. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[4]  O. Sporns,et al.  Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  Angelo Bifone,et al.  Modular structure of brain functional networks: breaking the resolution limit by Surprise , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Martin Rosvall,et al.  Estimating the resolution limit of the map equation in community detection. , 2014, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[7]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Investigations into resting-state connectivity using independent component analysis , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Yves Rosseel,et al.  neuRosim: An R Package for Generating fMRI Data , 2011 .

[10]  Yves Rosseel,et al.  On the Definition of Signal-To-Noise Ratio and Contrast-To-Noise Ratio for fMRI Data , 2013, PloS one.

[11]  E. Bullmore,et al.  Behavioral / Systems / Cognitive Functional Connectivity and Brain Networks in Schizophrenia , 2010 .

[12]  Martin Rosvall,et al.  Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  E. Bullmore,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Human Cortical Networks in Health and Schizophrenia , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  Xin-She Yang,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 2021, Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms.

[15]  D S Callaway,et al.  Network robustness and fragility: percolation on random graphs. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[16]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[17]  Edward T. Bullmore,et al.  Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience Systems Neuroscience , 2022 .

[18]  Cedric E. Ginestet,et al.  Cognitive relevance of the community structure of the human brain functional coactivation network , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  M. V. D. Heuvel,et al.  Brain Networks in Schizophrenia , 2014, Neuropsychology Review.

[20]  F. Radicchi,et al.  Benchmark graphs for testing community detection algorithms. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[21]  M. Meilă Comparing clusterings---an information based distance , 2007 .

[22]  N. Higham COMPUTING A NEAREST SYMMETRIC POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE MATRIX , 1988 .

[23]  Mariano Sigman,et al.  A small world of weak ties provides optimal global integration of self-similar modules in functional brain networks , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Angelo Bifone,et al.  Community detection in weighted brain connectivity networks beyond the resolution limit , 2016, NeuroImage.

[25]  Leon Danon,et al.  Comparing community structure identification , 2005, cond-mat/0505245.

[26]  Vincent A. Traag,et al.  Detecting communities using asymptotical Surprise , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[27]  Andreas Goerdt The Giant Component Threshold for Random Regular Graphs with Edge Faults , 1997, MFCS.

[28]  Gábor Csárdi,et al.  The igraph software package for complex network research , 2006 .

[29]  G. Glover,et al.  Physiological noise in oxygenation‐sensitive magnetic resonance imaging , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[30]  S. Rombouts,et al.  Consistent resting-state networks across healthy subjects , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  J. Rissanen,et al.  Modeling By Shortest Data Description* , 1978, Autom..

[32]  O. Sporns,et al.  Rich-Club Organization of the Human Connectome , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.