A multi-center distributed learning approach for Parkinson's disease classification using the traveling model paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distributed learning is a promising alternative to central learning for machine learning (ML) model training, overcoming data-sharing problems in healthcare. Previous studies exploring federated learning (FL) or the traveling model (TM) setup for medical image-based disease classification often relied on large databases with a limited number of centers or simulated artificial centers, raising doubts about real-world applicability. This study develops and evaluates a convolution neural network (CNN) for Parkinson's disease classification using data acquired by 83 diverse real centers around the world, mostly contributing small training samples. Our approach specifically makes use of the TM setup, which has proven effective in scenarios with limited data availability but has never been used for image-based disease classification. Our findings reveal that TM is effective for training CNN models, even in complex real-world scenarios with variable data distributions. After sufficient training cycles, the TM-trained CNN matches or slightly surpasses the performance of the centrally trained counterpart (AUROC of 83% vs. 80%). Our study highlights, for the first time, the effectiveness of TM in 3D medical image classification, especially in scenarios with limited training samples and heterogeneous distributed data. These insights are relevant for situations where ML models are supposed to be trained using data from small or remote medical centers, and rare diseases with sparse cases. The simplicity of this approach enables a broad application to many deep learning tasks, enhancing its clinical utility across various contexts and medical facilities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".