Progress in scientific disciplines is accompanied by standardization of terminology. Network neuroscience, at the level of macro-scale organization of the brain, is beginning to confront the challenges associated with developing a taxonomy of its fundamental explanatory constructs. The Workgroup for HArmonized Taxonomy of NETworks (WHATNET) was formed in 2020 as an Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM)-endorsed best practices committee to provide recommendations on points of consensus, identify open questions, and highlight areas of ongoing debate in the service of moving the field towards standardized reporting of network neuroscience results. The committee conducted a survey to catalog current practices in large-scale brain network nomenclature. A few well-known network names (e.g., default mode network) dominated responses to the survey, and a number of illuminating points of disagreement emerged. We summarize survey results and provide initial considerations and recommendations from the workgroup. This perspective piece includes a selective review of challenges to this enterprise, including 1) network scale, resolution, and hierarchies; 2) inter-individual variability of networks; 3) dynamics and non-stationarity of networks; 4) consideration of network affiliations of subcortical structures; and 5) consideration of multi-modal information. We close with minimal reporting guidelines for the cognitive and network neuroscience communities to adopt. Author Summary The idea that the brain is composed of multiple large-scale networks has steadily gained traction over the past decade. Still, the field has not yet reached consensus on key issues regarding terminology. The Workgroup for HArmonized Taxonomy of NETworks (WHATNET) was formed in 2020 as an Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM)-endorsed best practices committee to provide concrete recommendations and reporting guidelines for the scientific community. WHATNET members engaged in regular discussions, conducted a survey to catalog current practices in large-scale brain network nomenclature, identified barriers to progress, and brainstormed tools that could be developed to help standardize reporting in future studies. Here we summarize these activities and provide important considerations and initial recommendations for the network neuroscience community, noting open questions and controversies that require further empirical and theoretical investigation.

The intrinsic function of the human brain is dynamic, giving rise to numerous behavioral subtypes that fluctuate distinctively at multiple timescales. One of the key dynamical processes that takes place in the brain is the interaction between core-periphery brain regions, which undergoes constant fluctuations associated with developmental time frames. Core-periphery dynamical changes associated with macroscale brain network dynamics span multiple timescales and may lead to atypical behavior and clinical symptoms. For example, recent evidence suggests that brain regions with shorter intrinsic timescales are located at the periphery of brain networks (e.g., sensorimotor hand, face areas) and are implicated in perception and movement. On the contrary, brain regions with longer timescales are core hub regions. These hubs are important for regulating interactions between the brain and the body during self-related cognition and emotion. In this review, we summarize a large body of converging evidence derived from time-resolved fMRI studies in autism to characterize atypical core-periphery brain dynamics and how they relate to core and contextual sensory and cognitive profiles.

Brain connectivity studies of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have historically relied on static measures of functional connectivity. Recent work has focused on identifying transient configurations of brain activity, yet several open questions remain regarding the nature of specific brain network dynamics in ASD. We used a dynamic coactivation pattern (CAP) approach to investigate the salience/midcingulo-insular (M-CIN) network, a locus of dysfunction in ASD, in a large multisite resting-state fMRI dataset collected from 172 children (ages 6–13 years; n = 75 ASD; n = 138 male). Following brain parcellation by using independent component analysis, dynamic CAP analyses were conducted and k -means clustering was used to determine transient activation patterns of the M-CIN. The frequency of occurrence of different dynamic CAP brain states was then compared between children with ASD and typically developing (TD) children. Dynamic brain configurations characterized by coactivation of the M-CIN with central executive/lateral fronto-parietal and default mode/medial fronto-parietal networks appeared less frequently in children with ASD compared with TD children. This study highlights the utility of time-varying approaches for studying altered M-CIN function in prevalent neurodevelopmental disorders. We speculate that altered M-CIN dynamics in ASD may underlie the inflexible behaviors commonly observed in children with the disorder. Author Summary Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder associated with altered patterns of functional brain connectivity. Little is currently known about how moment-to-moment brain dynamics differ in children with ASD and typically developing (TD) children. Altered functional integrity of the midcingulo-insular network (M-CIN) has been implicated in the neurobiology of ASD. Here we use a novel coactivation analysis approach applied to a large sample of resting-state fMRI data collected from children with ASD and TD children to demonstrate altered patterns of M-CIN dynamics in children with the disorder. We speculate that these atypical patterns of brain dynamics may underlie behavioral inflexibility in ASD.

Contemporary functional neuroimaging research has increasingly focused on characterization of intrinsic or “spontaneous” brain activity. Analysis of intrinsic activity is often contrasted with analysis of task-evoked activity that has traditionally been the focus of cognitive neuroscience. But does this evoked/intrinsic dichotomy adequately characterize human brain function? Based on empirical data demonstrating a close functional interdependence between intrinsic and task-evoked activity, we argue that the dichotomy between intrinsic and task-evoked activity as unobserved contributions to brain activity is artificial. We present an alternative picture of brain function in which the brain’s spatiotemporal dynamics do not consist of separable intrinsic and task-evoked components, but reflect the enaction of a system of mutual constraints to move the brain into and out of task-appropriate functional configurations. According to this alternative picture, cognitive neuroscientists are tasked with describing both the temporal trajectory of brain activity patterns across time , and the modulation of this trajectory by task states, without separating this process into intrinsic and task-evoked components. We argue that this alternative picture of brain function is best captured in a novel explanatory framework called enabling constraint . Overall, these insights call for a reconceptualization of functional brain activity, and should drive future methodological and empirical efforts.