MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604400671 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v31i1.11181

Healthy Cognitive Aging: A Hybrid Random Vector Functional-Link Model for the Analysis of Alzheimer’s Disease

2017· article· en· W2604400671 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Dai, Femida Gwadry‐Sridhar, Michael Bauer, Michael Borrie, Xue Teng

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsRandom forestSupport vector machineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningNeuroimagingMultilayer perceptronDiseaseClinical trialCognitionLinear discriminant analysisDecision treeArtificial neural networkMedicinePsychologyNeurosciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a genetically complex neurodegenerative disease, which leads to irreversible brain damage, severe cognitive problems and ultimately death. A number of clinical trials and study initiatives have been set up to investigate AD pathology, leading to large amounts of high dimensional heterogeneous data (biomarkers) for analysis. This paper focuses on combining clinical features from different modalities, including medical imaging, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), etc., to diagnose AD and predict potential progression. Due to privacy and legal issues involved with clinical research, the study cohort (number of patients) is relatively small, compared to thousands of available biomarkers (predictors). We propose a hybrid pathological analysis model, which integrates manifold learning and Random Vector functional-link network (RVFL) so as to achieve better ability to extract discriminant information with limited training materials. Furthermore, we model (current and future) cognitive healthiness as a regression problem about age. By comparing the difference between predicted age and actual age, we manage to show statistical differences between different pathological stages. Verification tests are conducted based on the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. Extensive comparison is made against different machine learning algorithms, i.e. Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), Decision Tree and Multilayer Perceptron (MLP). Experimental results show that our proposed algorithm achieves better results than the comparison targets, which indicates promising robustness for practical clinical implementation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207