The Objective Dementia Severity Scale Based on MRI with Contrastive Learning: A Whole Brain Neuroimaging Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the clinical treatment of Alzheimer's disease, one of the most important tasks is evaluating its severity for diagnosis and therapy. However, traditional testing methods are deficient, such as their susceptibility to subjective factors, incomplete evaluation, low accuracy, or insufficient granularity, resulting in unreliable evaluation scores. To address these issues, we propose an objective dementia severity scale based on MRI (ODSS-MRI) using contrastive learning to automatically evaluate the neurological function of patients. The approach utilizes a deep learning framework and a contrastive learning strategy to mine relevant information from structural magnetic resonance images to obtain the patient's neurological function level score. Given that the model is driven by the patient's whole brain imaging data, but without any possible biased manual intervention or instruction from the physician or patient, it provides a comprehensive and objective evaluation of the patient's neurological function. We conducted experiments on the Alzheimer's disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset, and the results showed that the proposed ODSS-MRI was correlated with the stages of AD 88.55% better than all existing methods. This demonstrates its efficacy to describe the neurological function changes of patients during AD progression. It also outperformed traditional psychiatric rating scales in discriminating different stages of AD, which is indicative of its superiority for neurological function evaluation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".