A Novel Deep Learning Radiomics Model to Discriminate AD, MCI and NC: An Exploratory Study Based on Tau PET Scans from ADNI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We explored a novel model based on deep learning radiomics (DLR) to differentiate Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients and normal control (NC) subjects. This model was validated in an exploratory study using tau positron emission tomography (tau-PET) scans. METHODS: In this study, we selected tau-PET scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database (ADNI), which included a total of 211 NC, 197 MCI, and 117 AD subjects. The dataset was divided into one training/validation group and one separate external group for testing. The proposed DLR model contained the following three steps: (1) pre-training of candidate deep learning models; (2) extraction and selection of DLR features; (3) classification based on support vector machine (SVM). In the comparative experiments, we compared the DLR model with three traditional models, including the SUVR model, traditional radiomics model, and a clinical model. Ten-fold cross-validation was carried out 200 times in the experiments. RESULTS: Compared with other models, the DLR model achieved the best classification performance, with an accuracy of 90.76% ± 2.15% in NC vs. MCI, 88.43% ± 2.32% in MCI vs. AD, and 99.92% ± 0.51% in NC vs. AD. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed DLR model had the potential clinical value to discriminate AD, MCI and NC.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".