Detecting Alzheimer Disease in EEG Data with Machine Learning and the Graph Discrete Fourier Transform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract Alzheimer Disease (AD) poses a significant and growing public health challenge worldwide. Early and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective intervention and care. In recent years, there has been a surge of interest in leveraging Electroen-cephalography (EEG) to improve the detection of AD. This paper focuses on the application of Graph Signal Processing (GSP) techniques using the Graph Discrete Fourier Transform (GDFT) to analyze EEG recordings for the detection of AD, by employing several machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models. We evaluate our models on publicly available EEG data containing 88 patients categorized into three groups: AD, Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD), and Healthy Controls (HC). Binary classification of dementia versus HC reached a top accuracy of 85% (SVM), while multiclass classification of AD, FTD, and HC attained a top accuracy of 44% (Naive Bayes). We provide novel GSP methodology for detecting AD, and form a framework for further experimentation to investigate GSP in the context of other neurodegenerative diseases across multiple data modalities, such as neuroimaging data in Major Depressive Disorder, Epilepsy, and Parkinson 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 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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".