MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385389000 · doi:10.18280/ria.370309

A Multi-Layer Perceptron Network-Based Model for Classifying Stages of Alzheimer's Disease Using Clinical Data

2023· article· en· W4385389000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nagarathna Chevvenahalli Rangegowda, Kusuma Mohanchandra, Anusha Preetham, Muquitha Almas, Harsha Huliyappa

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptronDiseaseLayer (electronics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMultilayer perceptronPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningArtificial neural networkData miningMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's Disease is a neurodegenerative disorder that progressively impairs individuals' ability to perform daily activities.This irreversible condition cannot be halted once initiated, but early detection may allow for treatments to slow its progression.In this study, clinical data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset were utilized to identify different stages of Alzheimer's and predict the time required for conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's Disease.Clinical indicators of Alzheimer's include age, education level, disease progression rate, and cognitive information.Machine learning techniques such as multi-layer perceptron networks, random forests, support vector machines, and decision tree classifiers were employed for binary and multi-class classification of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), Late Mild Cognitive Impairment (LMCI), Early Mild Cognitive Impairment (EMCI), and Cognitive Control (CN).Among these techniques, the multi-layer perceptron network demonstrated superior performance, achieving accuracies of 99.97% for AD vs LMCI, 99.57% for AD vs EMCI, 99.96% for AD vs CN, 95.05% for EMCI vs CN and LMCI vs CN, 99.97% for AD vs LMCI vs CN, 91.2% for EMCI vs LMCI vs AD, 86.25% for CN vs EMCI vs LMCI, 91.94% for CN vs LMCI vs AD, 85.14% for CN vs EMCI vs AD, and 77.5% for AD vs LMCI vs EMCI vs CN.The proposed model has the potential to facilitate early detection and prediction of Alzheimer's stages without the need for imaging scans, thus offering a valuable tool for clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.560
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.111 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207