ArcheD, a residual neural network for prediction of cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta from amyloid PET images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Detection and measurement of amyloid-beta (Aβ) aggregation in the brain is a key factor for early identification and diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). We aimed to develop a deep learning model to predict Aβ cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentration directly from amyloid PET images, independent of tracers, brain reference regions or preselected regions of interest. We used 1870 Aβ PET images and CSF measurements to train and validate a convolutional neural network (“ArcheD”). We evaluated the ArcheD performance in relation to episodic memory and the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) of cortical Aβ. We also compared the brain region’s relevance for the model’s CSF prediction within clinical-based and biological-based classifications. ArcheD-predicted Aβ CSF values correlated strongly with measured Aβ CSF values ( r =0.81; p <0.001) and showed correlations with SUVR and episodic memory measures in all participants except in those with AD. For both clinical and biological classifications, cerebral white matter significantly contributed to CSF prediction ( q <0.01), specifically in non-symptomatic and early stages of AD. However, in late-stage disease, brain stem, subcortical areas, cortical lobes, limbic lobe, and basal forebrain made more significant contributions (q<0.01). Considering cortical gray matter separately, the parietal lobe was the strongest predictor of CSF amyloid levels in those with prodromal or early AD, while the temporal lobe played a more crucial role for those with AD. In summary, ArcheD reliably predicted Aβ CSF concentration from Aβ PET scans, offering potential clinical utility for Aβ level determination and early AD detection.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".