Perturbing whole-brain models of brain hierarchy: An application for depression following pharmacological treatment
Using whole‑brain models guided by the thermodynamics of mind, the authors perturb model parameters to estimate brain hierarchy and quantify state susceptibility and drivability in major depressive disorder before and after psilocybin or escitalopram treatment. They find escitalopram reduces susceptibility while psilocybin increases it, yet both treatments promote transitions to healthier states, demonstrating the models' potential to inform in‑silico neurostimulation protocols for neuropsychiatric disorders.
Authors
- Robin Carhart-Harris
- David Nutt
- David Erritzoe
Published
Abstract
Determining the scale of neural representations is a central challenge in neuroscience. While localized representations have traditionally dominated, evidence suggests information is also encoded in distributed, hierarchical networks. Recent research indicates that the hierarchy of causal influences shaping functional patterns serves as a signature of distinct brain states, with implications for neuropsychiatric disorders. Here, we first explore how whole‐brain models, guided by the thermodynamics of mind framework, estimate brain hierarchy and how perturbing such models enables the study of in‐silico transitions represented by static functional connectivity. We then apply this to major depressive disorder, where different brain hierarchical reconfigurations emerge following psilocybin and escitalopram treatments. We build resting‐state whole‐brain models of depressed patients before and after interventions and conduct a dynamic sensitivity analysis to explore brain states’ susceptibility—measuring their capacity to change—and their drivability to healthier states. We show that susceptibility is on average reduced by escitalopram and increased by psilocybin, and that both treatments promote healthier transitions. These results align with the post‐treatment window of plasticity opened by serotonergic psychedelics and the similar clinical efficacy of both drugs in trials. Overall, this work demonstrates how whole‐brain models of brain hierarchy can inform in‐silico neurostimulation protocols for neuropsychiatric disorders.
Research Summary of 'Perturbing whole-brain models of brain hierarchy: An application for depression following pharmacological treatment'
Introduction
Understanding the scale at which the brain represents information—localised single neurons versus distributed hierarchical networks—remains a central challenge. Earlier research using fMRI, MEG and diffusion tractography has shown that functional connectivity (FC) and structural connectivity (SC) capture distributed network organisation, and graph-theoretical approaches have revealed features such as modularity and small-worldness. However, symmetric FC alone does not resolve the causal, hierarchical relationships between regions. To address this, the thermodynamics of mind framework links temporal irreversibility in neural time series to hierarchical, directional information flow; incorporating such asymmetry into generative whole-brain models produces generative effective connectivity (GEC) that aims to identify mechanistic drivers of functional hierarchy.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Full Text PDF
Full Paper PDF
Pro members can view the original manuscript directly in the browser.
Study Details
- Study Typeindividual
- Journal
- Compound
- Topics
- Authors
- APA Citation
Socoró‐Garrigosa, M., Perl, Y. S., Kringelbach, M. L., Erritzoe, D., Nutt, D. J., Carhart‐Harris, R., Vohryzek, J., & Deco, G. (2025). Perturbing whole-brain models of brain hierarchy: An application for depression following pharmacological treatment. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1550(1), 255-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15391
References (15)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Vohryzek, J., Cabral, J., Lord, L. D. et al. · Brain Communications (2024)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Bolstridge, M., Rucker, J. et al. · Lancet Psychiatry (2016)
Palhano-Fontes, F., Barreto, D., Onias, H. et al. · Psychological Medicine (2018)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Nutt, D. J. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2017)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Friston, K. J. · Pharmacological Reviews (2019)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Giribaldi, B., Watts, R. et al. · New England Journal of Medicine (2021)
Daws, R. E., Timmermann, C., Giribaldi, B. et al. · Nature Medicine (2022)
Kringelbach, M. L., Cruzat, J., Cabral, J. et al. · PNAS (2020)
Nichols, D. E. · Pharmacological Reviews (2016)
Vargas, M. V., Dunlap, L. E., Dong, C. et al. · Science (2023)
Show all 15 referencesShow fewer
Carhart-Harris, R. L. · Current Opinion in Psychiatry (2019)
Calder, A. E., Hasler, G. · Neuropsychopharmacology (2022)
Atasoy, S., Vohryzek, J., Deco, G. et al. · Progress in Brain Research (2018)
Cruzat, J., Perl, Y. S., Escrichs, A. et al. · Network Neuroscience (2022)
Varley, T. F., Carhart-Harris, R., Roseman, L. et al. · NeuroImage (2020)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.