MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215207525 · doi:10.1186/s13195-021-00924-2

Improving 3D convolutional neural network comprehensibility via interactive visualization of relevance maps: evaluation in Alzheimer's disease.

2021· article· en· W3215207525 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martin Dyrba, Moritz Hanzig, Slawek Altenstein, Sebastian Bader, Tommaso Ballarini, Frederic Brosseron, Katharina Büerger, Daniel Cantré, Peter Dechent, Laura Dobisch, Emrah Düzel, Michael Ewers, Klaus Fließbach, Wenzel Glanz, John­–Dylan Haynes, Michael T. Heneka, Daniel Janowitz, Deniz Baris Keles, Ingo Kilimann, Christoph Laske, Franziska Maier, Coraline D. Metzger, Robert Perneczky, Oliver Peters, Lukas Preis, Josef Priller, Boris‐Stephan Rauchmann, Nina Roy, Klaus Scheffler, Anja Schneider, Björn H. Schott, Annika Spottke, Eike Spruth, Marc‐André Weber, Birgit Ertl‐Wagner, Michael Wagner, Jens Wiltfang, Frank Jessen, Stefan Teipel

Bibliographic record

VenuePUBLISSO (German National Library of Medicine) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkRelevance (law)DementiaComputer scienceVisualizationDiscriminative modelMagnetic resonance imagingArtificial intelligenceAtrophyClinical significancePattern recognition (psychology)DiseaseMedicinePathologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background!#!Although convolutional neural networks (CNNs) achieve high diagnostic accuracy for detecting Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, they are not yet applied in clinical routine. One important reason for this is a lack of model comprehensibility. Recently developed visualization methods for deriving CNN relevance maps may help to fill this gap as they allow the visualization of key input image features that drive the decision of the model. We investigated whether models with higher accuracy also rely more on discriminative brain regions predefined by prior knowledge.!##!Methods!#!We trained a CNN for the detection of AD in N = 663 T1-weighted MRI scans of patients with dementia and amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and verified the accuracy of the models via cross-validation and in three independent samples including in total N = 1655 cases. We evaluated the association of relevance scores and hippocampus volume to validate the clinical utility of this approach. To improve model comprehensibility, we implemented an interactive visualization of 3D CNN relevance maps, thereby allowing intuitive model inspection.!##!Results!#!Across the three independent datasets, group separation showed high accuracy for AD dementia versus controls (AUC ≥ 0.91) and moderate accuracy for amnestic MCI versus controls (AUC ≈ 0.74). Relevance maps indicated that hippocampal atrophy was considered the most informative factor for AD detection, with additional contributions from atrophy in other cortical and subcortical regions. Relevance scores within the hippocampus were highly correlated with hippocampal volumes (Pearson's r ≈ -0.86, p < 0.001).!##!Conclusion!#!The relevance maps highlighted atrophy in regions that we had hypothesized a priori. This strengthens the comprehensibility of the CNN models, which were trained in a purely data-driven manner based on the scans and diagnosis labels. The high hippocampus relevance scores as well as the high performance achieved in independent samples support the validity of the CNN models in the detection of AD-related MRI abnormalities. The presented data-driven and hypothesis-free CNN modeling approach might provide a useful tool to automatically derive discriminative features for complex diagnostic tasks where clear clinical criteria are still missing, for instance for the differential diagnosis between various types of dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations65
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePUBLISSO (German National Library of Medicine)Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207