MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566735941 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v30i1.9915

Bagging Ensembles for the Diagnosis and Prognostication of Alzheimer's Disease

2016· article· en· W2566735941 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Dai, Femida Gwadry‐Sridhar, Michael Bauer, Michael Borrie

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsRandom forestSupport vector machineArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMachine learningCorrelationFeature (linguistics)DiseaseDecision treeRobustness (evolution)MedicineMathematicsPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease, which involves the degeneration of various brain functions, resulting in memory loss, cognitive disorder and death. Large amounts of multivariate heterogeneous medical test data are available for the analysis of brain deterioration. How to measure the deterioration remains a challenging problem. In this study, we first investigate how different regions of the human brain change as the patient develops AD. Correlation analysis and feature ranking are performed based on the feature vectors from different stages of the pathologic process in Alzheimer disease. Then, an automatic diagnosis system is presented, which is based on a hybrid manifold learning for feature embedding and the bootstrap aggregating (Bagging) algorithm for classification.We investigate two different tasks, i.e. diagnosis and progression prediction. Extensive comparison is made against Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forest (RF), Decision Tree (DT) and Random Subspace (RS) methods. Experimental results show that our proposed algorithm yields superior results when compared to the other methods, suggesting promising robustness for possible clinical applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.178
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207