A quadratic function of activation in individuals at risk of Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Brain activation is hypothesized to form an inverse U-shape in prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD), with hyperactivation in the early phase, followed by hypoactivation. Methods Using task-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we tested the inverse U-shape hypothesis with polynomial regressions and between-group comparisons in individuals with subjective cognitive decline plus (SCD+; smaller hippocampal volumes compared to a group of healthy controls without SCD and/or apolipoprotein E [APOE] ε4 allele) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Results A quadratic function modeled the relationship between proxies of disease severity (neurodegeneration, memory performance) and left superior parietal activation. Linear negative functions modeled the relationship between neurodegeneration and left hippocampal/right inferior temporal activation. Group comparison indicated presence of hyperactivation in SCD+ and hypoactivation in MCI in the left superior parietal lobule, relative to healthy controls. Discussion These findings support the presence of an inverse U-shape model of activation and suggest that hyperactivation might represent a biomarker of the early AD stages.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".