Studying the Manifold Structure of Alzheimer's Disease: A Deep Learning Approach Using Convolutional Autoencoders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many classical machine learning techniques have been used to explore Alzheimer's disease (AD), evolving from image decomposition techniques such as principal component analysis toward higher complexity, non-linear decomposition algorithms. With the arrival of the deep learning paradigm, it has become possible to extract high-level abstract features directly from MRI images that internally describe the distribution of data in low-dimensional manifolds. In this work, we try a new exploratory data analysis of AD based on deep convolutional autoencoders. We aim at finding links between cognitive symptoms and the underlying neurodegeneration process by fusing the information of neuropsychological test outcomes, diagnoses, and other clinical data with the imaging features extracted solely via a data-driven decomposition of MRI. The distribution of the extracted features in different combinations is then analyzed and visualized using regression and classification analysis, and the influence of each coordinate of the autoencoder manifold over the brain is estimated. The imaging-derived markers could then predict clinical variables with correlations above 0.6 in the case of neuropsychological evaluation variables such as the MMSE or the ADAS11 scores, achieving a classification accuracy over 80% for the diagnosis of AD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".