MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214771047 · doi:10.3390/jimaging8030056

Principal Component Analysis versus Subject’s Residual Profile Analysis for Neuroinflammation Investigation in Parkinson Patients: A PET Brain Imaging Study

2022· article· en· W4214771047 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNuclear Receptors and Signaling
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroinflammationLRRK2Parkinson's diseaseMicrogliaPrincipal component analysisPathologicalDiseaseMedicineNeurosciencePsychologyInternal medicineInflammationArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dysfunction of neurons in the central nervous system is the primary pathological feature of Parkinson’s disease (PD). Despite different triggering, emerging evidence indicates that neuroinflammation revealed through microglia activation is critical for PD. Moreover, recent investigations sought a potential relationship between Lrrk2 genetic mutation and microglia activation. In this paper, neuroinflammation in sporadic PD, Lrrk2-PD and unaffected Lrrk2 mutation carriers were investigated. The principal component analysis (PCA) and the subject’s residual profile (SRP) techniques were performed on multiple groups and regions of interest in 22 brain-regions. The 11C-PBR28 binding profiles were compared in four genotypes depending on groups, i.e., HC, sPD, Lrrk2-PD and UC, using the PCA and SPR scores. The genotype effect was found as a principal feature of group-dependent 11C-PBR28 binding, and preliminary evidence of a MAB-Lrrk2 mutation interaction in manifest Parkinson’s and subjects at risk was found.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.251 · 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