Prediction of misfolded proteins spreading in Alzheimer’s disease using machine learning and spreading models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pervasive impact of Alzheimer's disease on aging society represents one of the main challenges at this time. Current investigations highlight 2 specific misfolded proteins in its development: Amyloid-$\beta$ and tau. Previous studies focused on spreading for misfolded proteins exploited simulations, which required several parameters to be empirically estimated. Here, we provide an alternative view based on 2 machine learning approaches which we compare with known simulation models. The first approach applies an autoregressive model constrained by structural connectivity, while the second is based on graph convolutional networks. The aim is to predict concentrations of Amyloid-$\beta$ 2 yr after a provided baseline. We also evaluate its real-world effectiveness and suitability by providing a web service for physicians and researchers. In experiments, the autoregressive model generally outperformed state-of-the-art models resulting in lower prediction errors. While it is important to note that a comprehensive prognostic plan cannot solely rely on amyloid beta concentrations, their prediction, achieved by the discussed approaches, can be valuable for planning therapies and other cures, especially when dealing with asymptomatic patients for whom novel therapies could prove effective.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".