MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200973239 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.716670

Classification of Alzheimer’s Disease Leveraging Multi-task Machine Learning Analysis of Speech and Eye-Movement Data

2021· article· en· W3200973239 on OpenAlexafffund
Hyeju Jang, Thomas Soroski, Matteo Rizzo, Oswald Barral, Anuj Harisinghani, Sally Newton-Mason, Saffrin Granby, Thiago Monnerat Stutz da Cunha Vasco, Caitlin Lewis, Pavan Tutt, Giuseppe Carenini, Cristina Conati, Thalia S. Field

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAlzheimer’s SocietyVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteAlzheimer's SocietyCentre for Aging + Brain Health InnovationConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissement
KeywordsDiscriminative modelEye movementCognitionTask (project management)Computer scienceParagraphMemory clinicCognitive impairmentPsychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative condition that results in impaired performance in multiple cognitive domains. Preclinical changes in eye movements and language can occur with the disease, and progress alongside worsening cognition. In this article, we present the results from a machine learning analysis of a novel multimodal dataset for AD classification. The cohort includes data from two novel tasks not previously assessed in classification models for AD (pupil fixation and description of a pleasant past experience), as well as two established tasks (picture description and paragraph reading). Our dataset includes language and eye movement data from 79 memory clinic patients with diagnoses of mild-moderate AD, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or subjective memory complaints (SMC), and 83 older adult controls. The analysis of the individual novel tasks showed similar classification accuracy when compared to established tasks, demonstrating their discriminative ability for memory clinic patients. Fusing the multimodal data across tasks yielded the highest overall AUC of 0.83 ± 0.01, indicating that the data from novel tasks are complementary to established tasks.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207