Brain age prediction using the graph neural network based on resting-state functional MRI in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease that significantly impacts the quality of life of patients and their families. Neuroimaging-driven brain age prediction has been proposed as a potential biomarker to detect mental disorders, such as AD, aiding in studying its effects on functional brain networks. Previous studies have shown that individuals with AD display impaired resting-state functional connections. However, most studies on brain age prediction have used structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with limited studies based on resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI). Methods: model was also used to identify the critical brain regions in AD. Results: The experimental results demonstrate that our GNN model can predict brain ages of normal controls using rs-fMRI data from the ADNI database. Moreover the differences between brain ages and chronological ages were more significant in AD patients than in normal controls. Our results also suggest that AD is associated with accelerated brain aging and that the GNN model based on resting-state functional connectivity is an effective tool for predicting brain age. Discussion: Our study provides evidence that rs-fMRI is a promising modality for brain age prediction in AD research, and the GNN model proves to be effective in predicting brain age. Furthermore, the effects of the hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus, and amygdala on brain age prediction are verified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".