MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388021206 · doi:10.18280/ts.400538

Enhanced Classification of Alzheimer’s Disease Stages via Weighted Optimized Deep Neural Networks and MRI Image Analysis

2023· article· en· W4388021206 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mudiyala Aparna, Battula Srinivasa Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceContextual image classificationDeep neural networksImage (mathematics)NeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease, a debilitating neurological disorder, precipitates irreversible cognitive decline and memory loss, predominantly affecting individuals aged 65 years and above.The need for an automated system capable of accurately diagnosing and stratifying Alzheimer's disease into distinct stages is paramount for early intervention and management.However, existing deep learning methodologies are often hampered by protracted training times.In this study, a time-efficient approach incorporating a two-phase transfer learning technique is proposed to surmount this challenge.This method is particularly efficacious in the analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data for the identification of Alzheimer's disease.The proposed detection system employs two-phase transfer learning, augmented with fine-tuning for multi-class classification of brain MRI scans.This allows for the categorization of images into four distinct classes: Mild Dementia (MD), Moderate Dementia (MOD), Non-Dementia (ND), and Very Mild Dementia (VMD).The classification of Alzheimer's disease was conducted using various pre-trained deep learning models, including ResNet50V2, InceptionResNetV2, Xception, DenseNet121, VGG16, and MobileNetV2.Among the models tested, ResNet50V2 demonstrated superior performance, achieving a training classification accuracy of 99.35% and a testing accuracy of 99.25%.The results underscore the potential of the proposed method in delivering more accurate classifications than those obtained from extant models, thereby contributing to the early detection and stratification of Alzheimer's disease.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207