Machine Learning Based Multimodal Neuroimaging Genomics Dementia Score for Predicting Future Conversion to Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing availability of databases containing both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and genetic data allows researchers to utilize multimodal data to better understand the characteristics of dementia of Alzheimer's type (DAT). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to develop and analyze novel biomarkers that can help predict the development and progression of DAT. METHODS: We used feature selection and ensemble learning classifier to develop an image/genotype-based DAT score that represents a subject's likelihood of developing DAT in the future. Three feature types were used: MRI only, genetic only, and combined multimodal data. We used a novel data stratification method to better represent different stages of DAT. Using a pre-defined 0.5 threshold on DAT scores, we predicted whether a subject would develop DAT in the future. RESULTS: Our results on Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database showed that dementia scores using genetic data could better predict future DAT progression for currently normal control subjects (Accuracy = 0.857) compared to MRI (Accuracy = 0.143), while MRI can better characterize subjects with stable mild cognitive impairment (Accuracy = 0.614) compared to genetics (Accuracy = 0.356). Combining MRI and genetic data showed improved classification performance in the remaining stratified groups. CONCLUSION: MRI and genetic data can contribute to DAT prediction in different ways. MRI data reflects anatomical changes in the brain, while genetic data can detect the risk of DAT progression prior to the symptomatic onset. Combining information from multimodal data appropriately can improve prediction performance.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".