Brain Asymmetry Detection and Machine Learning Classification for Diagnosis of Early Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early identification of degenerative processes in the human brain is considered essential for providing proper care and treatment. This may involve detecting structural and functional cerebral changes such as changes in the degree of asymmetry between the left and right hemispheres. Changes can be detected by computational algorithms and used for the early diagnosis of dementia and its stages (amnestic early mild cognitive impairment (EMCI), Alzheimer's Disease (AD)), and can help to monitor the progress of the disease. In this vein, the paper proposes a data processing pipeline that can be implemented on commodity hardware. It uses features of brain asymmetries, extracted from MRI of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database, for the analysis of structural changes, and machine learning classification of the pathology. The experiments provide promising results, distinguishing between subjects with normal cognition (NC) and patients with early or progressive dementia. Supervised machine learning algorithms and convolutional neural networks tested are reaching an accuracy of 92.5% and 75.0% for NC vs. EMCI, and 93.0% and 90.5% for NC vs. AD, respectively. The proposed pipeline offers a promising low-cost alternative for the classification of dementia and can be potentially useful to other brain degenerative disorders that are accompanied by changes in the brain asymmetries.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".