Genetic Algorithms for Optimized Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease and Frontotemporal Dementia Using Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic algorithms have a proven capability to explore a large space of solutions, and deal with very large numbers of input features. We hypothesized that the application of these algorithms to 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) may help in diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD) by selecting the most meaningful features and automating diagnosis. We aimed to develop algorithms for the three main issues in the diagnosis: discrimination between patients with AD or FTD and healthy controls (HC), differential diagnosis between behavioral FTD (bvFTD) and AD, and differential diagnosis between primary progressive aphasia (PPA) variants. Genetic algorithms, customized with K-Nearest Neighbor and BayesNet Naives as the fitness function, were developed and compared with Principal Component Analysis (PCA). K-fold cross validation within the same sample and external validation with ADNI-3 samples were performed. External validation was performed for the algorithms distinguishing AD and HC. Our study supports the use of FDG-PET imaging, which allowed a very high accuracy rate for the diagnosis of AD, FTD, and related disorders. Genetic algorithms identified the most meaningful features with the minimum set of features, which may be relevant for automated assessment of brain FDG-PET images. Overall, our study contributes to the development of an automated, and optimized diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders using brain metabolism.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".