MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387442026 · doi:10.32604/cmc.2023.039020

Detection of Different Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease Using CNN Classifier

2023· article· en· W4387442026 on OpenAlexafffund
Sakib Mahmud, Md. Mamun Ali, Mohammad Fahim Shahriar, Fahad Ahmed Al-Zahrani, Kawsar Ahmed, Dip Nandi, Francis M. Bui

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOverfittingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machineRandom forestMachine learningCognitive impairmentBinary classificationPreprocessorConvolutional neural networkOversamplingDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Prodromal StageCognitionArtificial neural networkPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a neurodevelopmental impairment that results in a person’s behavior, thinking, and memory loss. The most common symptoms of AD are losing memory and early aging. In addition to these, there are several serious impacts of AD. However, the impact of AD can be mitigated by early-stage detection though it cannot be cured permanently. Early-stage detection is the most challenging task for controlling and mitigating the impact of AD. The study proposes a predictive model to detect AD in the initial phase based on machine learning and a deep learning approach to address the issue. To build a predictive model, open-source data was collected where five stages of images of AD were available as Cognitive Normal (CN), Early Mild Cognitive Impairment (EMCI), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), Late Mild Cognitive Impairment (LMCI), and AD. Every stage of AD is considered as a class, and then the dataset was divided into three parts binary class, three class, and five class. In this research, we applied different preprocessing steps with augmentation techniques to efficiently identify AD. It integrates a random oversampling technique to handle the imbalance problem from target classes, mitigating the model overfitting and biases. Then three machine learning classifiers, such as random forest (RF), K-Nearest neighbor (KNN), and support vector machine (SVM), and two deep learning methods, such as convolutional neuronal network (CNN) and artificial neural network (ANN) were applied on these datasets. After analyzing the performance of the used models and the datasets, it is found that CNN with binary class outperformed 88.20% accuracy. The result of the study indicates that the model is highly potential to detect AD in the initial phase.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print)Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207