Predicting Progression from Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Dementia with Adversarial Attacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease plays a crucial role in treatment planning that might slow down the disease’s progression. This problem is commonly posed as a classification task performed by machine learning and deep learning techniques. Although data-driven techniques set the state-of-the-art in many domains, the scale of the available datasets in Alzheimer’s research is not sufficient to learn complex models from patient data. This study proposes a simple yet promising framework to predict the conversion from Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). The proposed framework comprises a shallow neural network for binary classification and a single-step gradient-based adversarial attack to find an adversarial progression direction in the input space. The step size required for the adversarial attack to change a patient’s diagnosis from MCI to AD indicates the distance to the decision boundary. The patient’s diagnosis at the next visit is predicted by employing this notion of distance to the decision boundary. We also present a potential application of the proposed framework to patient subtyping. Experiments with two publicly available datasets for Alzheimer’s disease research provide evidence that the proposed framework can address predicting MCI-to-AD conversion and subtyping by only training a shallow neural network.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".