MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312247626 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2022.3231905

Contrastive Learning for Prediction of Alzheimer's Disease Using Brain 18F-FDG PET

2022· article· en· W4312247626 on OpenAlexaff
Yonglin Chen, Huabin Wang, Gong Zhang, Xiao Liu, Wei Huang, Xianjun Han, Xuejun Li, Melanie Martin, Liang Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Anhui ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionDeep learningAbnormalityFeature (linguistics)Robustness (evolution)Feature learningPositron emission tomographyMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain 18F-FDG PET images are commonly-known materials for effectively predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the data volume of PET is usually insufficient, which is unfavorable to train an accurate AD prediction networks. Furthermore, the PET image is noisy with low signal-to-noise ratio, and simultaneously the feature (metabolic abnormality) used for predicting AD in PET image is not always obvious. Therefore, a contrastive-based learning method is proposed to address the challenges of PET image inherently possessed. Firstly, the slices of 3D PET image are amplified by cropping the image of anchors (i.e., an augmented version of the same image) to generate extended training data. Meanwhile, contrastive loss is adopted to enlarge inter-class feature distances and reduce intra-class feature differences using subject fuzzy labels as supervised information. Secondly, we construct a double convolutional hybrid attention module to enhance the network to learn different perceptual domains where two convolutional layers with different convolutional kernels ($7\times 7$ and $5\times 5$) are constructed. Moreover, we recommend a diagnosis mechanism by analyzing the consistency of predicted result for PET slices alone with clinical neuropsychological assessment to achieve a better AD diagnosis. The experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms the state-of-the-arts for brain 18F-FDG PET images, and hence demonstrate the advantage of the method in effectively predicting AD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207