## 3 Results
### Neuroimaging Results
#### 3.2.2 RS-fMRI Results: Spectral Power and Level of Intra-Network Coherent Activity  
Patients displayed different aspects of faster BOLD fluctuations, suggestive of decreased coherence of intra-network activity compared with controls [39], in several networks (Figure 1). They displayed both decreased low (\(\leq\)0.1 Hz) and very low (\(<\)0.05 Hz) frequency power, and increased high (\(>\)0.1 Hz) frequency power, in sensorimotor (21), visual (1,5), basal ganglia (2) and executive (48) networks. Other components displayed either decreased low frequency power in the left executive control network (75), or increased high frequency power in the default mode (9,34), sensorimotor (28), dorsal attentional (38) and language (22,56) networks, and in both the anterior (49) and posterior (14) sectors of the salience network.  
Executive performance was positively correlated with power at the higher bound of low frequencies (=0.1 Hz) in the dorsal (36) and anterior salience (16) attentional networks, and negatively correlated with high frequency power in the posterior DMN (50) (Figure 2A). Spec  
Figure 1: Degree of coherence of intra-network activity: group effects. For the components displaying a significant group difference (**A**), the strength and direction of this effect is shown by the colored frequency bins depicted in panel (**C**). In the latter, decreased coherence of intra-network activity is shown by reduced low frequency power (\(<\)0.1 Hz; blue), increase of high frequency power (\(>\)0.1 Hz; red), or both. In panel (**B**), the plots of spectral power depict the grand average, across the significant components reported above, of mean (\(\pm\) standard error) spectral power in the 0–0.25 Hz frequency band for controls (blue) and patients (pink).  
tral power did not differ across groups in these components. Instead, there was a significant task-by-group interaction in the executive (26,43) and posterior default mode (50) networks (Figure 2B): patients displayed a stronger relationship, compared with controls, between executive performance and (a) greater low frequency power in the executive components 26 and 43; and (b) smaller high frequency power in the posterior DMN (50). Again, none of these components displayed a significant main effect of group in spectral power.  
Figure 2: Degree of coherence of intra-network activity: relationship with executive skills in the whole sample and task-by-group interaction. For the components displaying a significant relationship with executive skills (**A1**), or a task-by-group interaction (**B1**), the strength and direction of this effect are shown by the frequency bins depicted in the respective panels (**A2,B2**). Regardless of group, the relationship between executive performance and intra-network coherent activity is depicted either by the positive correlation between performance and low frequency spectral power (higher coherent activity) in attentional and anterior salience networks, or by the negative correlation between performance and high frequency spectral power (lower coherent activity) in the posterior DMN (**A2**). Task-by-group interaction analyses highlighted a stronger relationship with executive performance, in patients than controls, in the same posterior DMN as well as in two frontal sectors of the executive control network (**B2**). Scatterplots show the correlation between executive performance and coherence of activity in the anterior salience network regardless of group (**A3**), and in the fronto-lateral executive network more in AUD patients than controls (**B3**).  
Control analyses highlighted no significant relationship between mean daily alcohol dose and coherence of intra-network activity in the aforementioned components.