Anomaly Analysis of Alzheimer’s Disease in PET Images Using an Unsupervised Adversarial Deep Learning Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the anomaly analysis of Alzheimer’s disease using positron emission tomography (PET) images using an unsupervised proposed adversarial model is investigated. The model consists of three parts: a parallel-network encoder, which is comprised of a convolutional pipeline and a dilated convolutional pipeline that extracts global and local features and concatenates them, a decoder that reconstructs the input image from the obtained feature vector, and a discriminator that distinguishes if the input image image is real or fake. The hypothesis is that if the proposed model is trained with only normal brain images, the corresponding construction loss for normal images should be minimal. However, if the input image belongs to a class that is designated as an anomaly that which the model is not trained with, then the construction loss will be high. This will reflect during the anomaly score comparison between the normal and the anomalous image. A multi-case analysis is performed for three major classes using the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset, Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and normal control. The base parallel-encoder network shows better classification accuracy than the benchmark models, and the proposed model that is built on the parallel model outperforms the benchmark anomaly detection models. The proposed model gave out 96.03% and 75.21% in classification and area under the curve score, respectively. Additionally, a qualitative evaluation done by using Fréchet inception distance gave a better score than the state-of-the-art by three points.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".