Discovering network phenotype between genetic risk factors and disease status via diagnosis-aligned multi-modality regression method in Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Neuroimaging genetics is an emerging field to identify the associations between genetic variants [e.g. single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)] and quantitative traits (QTs) such as brain imaging phenotypes. However, most of the current studies focus only on the associations between brain structure imaging and genetic variants, while neglecting the connectivity information between brain regions. In addition, the brain itself is a complex network, and the higher-order interaction may contain useful information for the mechanistic understanding of diseases [i.e. Alzheimer's disease (AD)]. RESULTS: A general framework is proposed to exploit network voxel information and network connectivity information as intermediate traits that bridge genetic risk factors and disease status. Specifically, we first use the sparse representation (SR) model to build hyper-network to express the connectivity features of the brain. The network voxel node features and network connectivity edge features are extracted from the structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), respectively. Second, a diagnosis-aligned multi-modality regression method is adopted to fully explore the relationships among modalities of different subjects, which can help further mine the relation between the risk genetics and brain network features. In experiments, all methods are tested on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. The experimental results not only verify the effectiveness of our proposed framework but also discover some brain regions and connectivity features that are highly related to diseases. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The Matlab code is available at http://ibrain.nuaa.edu.cn/2018/list.htm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".