Examining stability of machine learning methods for predicting dementia at early phases of the disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia is a neuropsychiatric brain disorder that usually occurs when one or more brain cells stop working partially or at all. Diagnosis of this disorder in the early phases of the disease is a vital task to rescue patients’ lives from bad consequences and provide them with better healthcare. Machine learning methods have been proven to be accurate in predicting dementia in the early phases of the disease. The prediction of dementia depends heavily on the type of collected data which usually are gathered from Normalized Whole Brain Volume (nWBV) and Atlas Scaling Factor (ASF) which are normally measured and corrected from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRIs). Other biological features such as age and gender can also help in the diagnosis of dementia. Although many studies use machine learning for predicting dementia, we could not reach a conclusion on the stability of these methods for which one is more accurate under different experimental conditions. Therefore, this paper investigates the conclusion stability regarding the performance of machine learning algorithms for dementia prediction. To accomplish this, a large number of experiments were run using 7 machine learning algorithms and two feature reduction algorithms namely, Information Gain (IG) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA). To examine the stability of these algorithms, thresholds of feature selection were changed for the IG from 20% to 100% and the PCA dimension from 2 to 8. This has resulted in 7×9 + 7×7= 112 experiments. In each experiment, various classification evaluation data were recorded. The obtained results show that among seven algorithms the support vector machine and Naïve Bayes are the most stable algorithms while changing the selection threshold. Also, it was found that using IG would seem more efficient than using PCA for predicting Dementia. These promising results open the door to a new era of early prognosis of Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD).
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".