Predicting an individual’s cognitive traits or clinical condition using brain signals is a central goal in modern neuroscience. This is commonly done using either structural aspects, such as structural connectivity or cortical thickness, or aggregated measures of brain activity that average over time. But these approaches are missing a central aspect of brain function: the unique ways in which an individual’s brain activity unfolds over time. One reason why these dynamic patterns are not usually considered is that they have to be described by complex, high-dimensional models; and it is unclear how best to use these models for prediction. We here propose an approach that describes dynamic functional connectivity and amplitude patterns using a Hidden Markov model (HMM) and combines it with the Fisher kernel, which can be used to predict individual traits. The Fisher kernel is constructed from the HMM in a mathematically principled manner, thereby preserving the structure of the underlying model. We show here, in fMRI data, that the HMM-Fisher kernel approach is accurate and reliable. We compare the Fisher kernel to other prediction methods, both time-varying and time-averaged functional connectivity-based models. Our approach leverages information about an individual’s time-varying amplitude and functional connectivity for prediction and has broad applications in cognitive neuroscience and personalised medicine.

Complex structural and functional changes occurring in typical and atypical development necessitate multidimensional approaches to better understand the risk of developing psychopathology. Here, we simultaneously examined structural and functional brain network patterns in relation to dimensions of psychopathology in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) dataset. Several components were identified, recapitulating the psychopathology hierarchy, with the general psychopathology (p) factor explaining most covariance with multimodal imaging features, while the internalizing, externalizing, and neurodevelopmental dimensions were each associated with distinct morphological and functional connectivity signatures. Connectivity signatures associated with the p factor and neurodevelopmental dimensions followed the sensory-to-transmodal axis of cortical organization, which is related to the emergence of complex cognition and risk for psychopathology. Results were consistent in two separate data subsamples and robust to variations in analytical parameters. Although model parameters yielded statistically significant brain–behavior associations in unseen data, generalizability of the model was rather limited for all three latent components (r change from within- to out-of-sample statistics: LC1_within = 0.36, LC1_out = 0.03; LC2_within = 0.34, LC2_out = 0.05; LC3_within = 0.35, LC3_out = 0.07). Our findings help in better understanding biological mechanisms underpinning dimensions of psychopathology, and could provide brain-based vulnerability markers.