Brain Controllability: not a slam dunk yet
Samir Suweis, Chengyi Tu, Rodrigo P. Rocha, Sandro Zampieri, Marzo, Zorzi and, Maurizio Corbetta

TL;DR
This paper critically examines the methodology used in brain controllability studies, highlighting limitations and warning signs that question the validity of previous results based on the one node controllability framework.
Contribution
The authors provide a detailed critique of existing brain controllability methods, emphasizing the need for more robust approaches beyond the current one node framework.
Findings
Numerical analysis in brain controllability can lead to ill-conditioned problems.
Current methodologies may produce results that are difficult to interpret.
The one node controllability framework is not fully justified by existing methods.
Abstract
In our recent article (Tu et al., Warnings and caveats in brain controllability, arXiv:1705.08261) we provided quantitative evidence to show that there are warnings and caveats in the way Gu and collaborators (Gu et al. Controllability of structural brain networks. Nature communications 6 (2015): 8414) define brain controllability. The comment by Pasqualetti et al. (Pasqualetti et al. RE: Warnings and Caveats in Brain Controllability. NeuroImage 297 (2019), 586-588) confirms the need to go beyond the methodology and approach presented in Gu et al. original work. In fact, they recognize that the source of confusion is due to the fact that assessing controllability via numerical analysis typically leads to ill-conditioned problems, and thus often generates results that are difficult to interpret. This is indeed the first warning we discussed: our work was not meant to prove that brain…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
