Multimodal biological brain age prediction using magnetic resonance imaging and angiography with the identification of predictive regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biological brain age predicted using machine learning models based on high-resolution imaging data has been suggested as a potential biomarker for neurological and cerebrovascular diseases. In this work, we aimed to develop deep learning models to predict the biological brain age using structural magnetic resonance imaging and angiography datasets from a large database of 2074 adults (21-81 years). Since different imaging modalities can provide complementary information, combining them might allow to identify more complex aging patterns, with angiography data, for instance, showing vascular aging effects complementary to the atrophic brain tissue changes seen in T1-weighted MRI sequences. We used saliency maps to investigate the contribution of cortical, subcortical, and arterial structures to the prediction. Our results show that combining T1-weighted and angiography MR data led to a significantly improved brain age prediction accuracy, with a mean absolute error of 3.85 years comparing the predicted and chronological age. The most predictive brain regions included the lateral sulcus, the fourth ventricle, and the amygdala, while the brain arteries contributing the most to the prediction included the basilar artery, the middle cerebral artery M2 segments, and the left posterior cerebral artery. Our study proposes a framework for brain age prediction using multimodal imaging, which gives accurate predictions and allows identifying the most predictive regions for this task, which can serve as a surrogate for the brain regions that are most affected by aging.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".