Opportunities for Understanding MS Mechanisms and Progression With MRI Using Large-Scale Data Sharing and Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) have heterogeneous clinical presentations, symptoms, and progression over time, making MS difficult to assess and comprehend in vivo. The combination of large-scale data sharing and artificial intelligence creates new opportunities for monitoring and understanding MS using MRI. First, development of validated MS-specific image analysis methods can be boosted by verified reference, test, and benchmark imaging data. Using detailed expert annotations, artificial intelligence algorithms can be trained on such MS-specific data. Second, understanding disease processes could be greatly advanced through shared data of large MS cohorts with clinical, demographic, and treatment information. Relevant patterns in such data that may be imperceptible to a human observer could be detected through artificial intelligence techniques. This applies from image analysis (lesions, atrophy, or functional network changes) to large multidomain datasets (imaging, cognition, clinical disability, genetics). After reviewing data sharing and artificial intelligence, we highlight 3 areas that offer strong opportunities for making advances in the next few years: crowdsourcing, personal data protection, and organized analysis challenges. Difficulties as well as specific recommendations to overcome them are discussed, in order to best leverage data sharing and artificial intelligence to improve image analysis, imaging, and the understanding of MS.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".