The Effect of Improving Facial Alignment Accuracy on the Video-based Detection of Neurological Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Automatic facial landmark localization is an essential component in many computer vision applications, including video-based detection of neurological diseases. Machine learning models for facial landmarks localization are typically trained on faces of healthy individuals, and we found that model performance is inferior when applied to faces of people with neurological diseases. Fine-tuning pre-trained models with representative images improves performance on clinical populations significantly. However, questions related to the characteristics of the database used to fine-tune the model and the clinical impact of the improved model remain. Methods: We employed the Toronto NeuroFace dataset – a dataset consisting videos of Healthy Controls (HC), individuals Post-Stroke, and individuals with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis performing speech and non-speech tasks with thousands of manually annotated frames - to fine-tune a well-known deep learning-based facial landmark localization model. The pre-trained and fine-tuned models were used to extract landmark-based facial features from videos, and the facial features were used to discriminate clinical groups from HC. Results: Fine-tuning a facial landmark localization model with a diverse database that includes HC and individuals with neurological disorders resulted in significantly improved performance for all groups. Our results also showed that fine-tuning the model with representative data greatly improved the ability of the subsequent classifier to classify clinical groups vs. HC from videos. Conclusions: Using a diverse database for model fine-tuning might result in better model performance for HC and clinical groups. We demonstrated that fine-tuning a model for landmark localization with representative data results in improved detection of neurological diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".