An Optimized Deep Learning Model for Predicting Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Structural MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to positively affect patients' lives. To save time and costs associated with clinical investigation, deep learning approaches have been used widely to predict MCI. This study proposes optimized deep learning models for differentiating between MCI and normal control samples. In previous studies, the hippocampus region located in the brain is used extensively to diagnose MCI. The entorhinal cortex is a promising area for diagnosing MCI since severe atrophy is observed when diagnosing the disease before the shrinkage of the hippocampus. Due to the small size of the entorhinal cortex area relative to the hippocampus, limited research has been conducted on the entorhinal cortex brain region for predicting MCI. This study involves the construction of a dataset containing only the entorhinal cortex area to implement the classification system. To extract the features of the entorhinal cortex area, three different neural network architectures are optimized independently: VGG16, Inception-V3, and ResNet50. The best outcomes were achieved utilizing the convolution neural network classifier and the Inception-V3 architecture for feature extraction, with accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve scores of 70%, 90%, 54%, and 69%, respectively. Furthermore, the model has an acceptable balance between precision and recall, achieving an F1 score of 73%. The results of this study validate the effectiveness of our approach in predicting MCI and may contribute to diagnosing MCI through MRI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".