MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790635453 · doi:10.3233/jad-170338

Multi-Modality Sparse Representation for Alzheimer’s Disease Classification

2018· article· en· W2790635453 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kichang Kwak, Hyuk Jin Yun, Gilsoon Park, Jongmin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroimagingDiscriminative modelArtificial intelligencePositron emission tomographySparse approximationHippocampusMagnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeCognitionFunctional magnetic resonance imagingAlzheimer's diseaseModality (human–computer interaction)Computer scienceNeuroscienceCognitive impairmentMedicinePsychologyDiseasePathologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are age-related neurodegenerative diseases characterized by progressive loss of memory and irreversible cognitive functions. The hippocampus, a brain area critical for learning and memory processes, is especially susceptible to damage at early stages of AD. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop prediction model using a multi-modality sparse representation approach. METHODS: We proposed a sparse representation approach to the hippocampus using structural T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) to distinguish AD/MCI from healthy control subjects (HCs). We considered structural and function information for the hippocampus and applied a sparse patch-based approach to effectively reduce the dimensions of neuroimaging biomarkers. RESULTS: In experiments using Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative data, our proposed method demonstrated more reliable than previous classification studies. The effects of different parameters on segmentation accuracy were also evaluated. The mean classification accuracy obtained with our proposed method was 0.94 for AD/HCs, 0.82 for MCI/HCs, and 0.86 for AD/MCI. CONCLUSION: We extracted multi-modal features from automatically defined hippocampal regions of training subjects and found this method to be discriminative and robust for AD and MCI classification. The extraction of features in T1 and FDG-PET images is expected to improve classification performance due to the relationship between brain structure and function.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207