MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000167727 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2019.01325

Automated Detection of Autism Spectrum Disorder Using a Convolutional Neural Network

2020· article· en· W3000167727 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkAutism spectrum disorderComputer scienceAutismArtificial intelligenceFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningDeep learningNeuroimagingPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) have provided a significant achievement in different machine learning tasks such as speech recognition, image classification, automotive software engineering, together with some substantial applications in neuroscience. This impressive progress is largely due to a combination of algorithmic breakthroughs, computation resource improvements, and access to a large amount of data. Method In this paper, we focused on the diagnosis of the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) via CNN using a large brain imaging dataset. We classified ASD patients using most common resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data represented by a multi-site database known as Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE). The proposed approach was able to classify individuals with autism compared to typical controls based on the patterns of functional connectivity. The outcome measure is accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the prediction of ASD from control subjects. Results: The experimental results indicate that our proposed model with 70.22 % diagnostic accuracy in classification of the ASD outperforms the previous works on ABIDE I dataset and for the CC400 functional parcellation atlas of the brain. Also, it was shown that the number of parameters used in our CNN model is fewer than the best known study in the ASD classification which leads to the reduction of the training time. The existing best-known method had a huge number of parameters, 19,961,200, in theirs final stage wheras we reduced it to 4,398,80221 parameters. The sensitivity and specificity were also measured in this study as part of our report

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.217 · 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