Machine learning prediction of future amyloid beta positivity in amyloid-negative individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) involves $$\beta$$ β -amyloid (A $$\beta$$ β ) accumulation. Early identification of individuals with abnormal $$\beta$$ β -amyloid levels is crucial, but A $$\beta$$ β quantification with positron emission tomography (PET) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is invasive and expensive. Methods We propose a machine learning framework using standard non-invasive (MRI, demographics, APOE, neuropsychology) measures to predict future A $$\beta$$ β -positivity in A $$\beta$$ β -negative individuals. We separately study A $$\beta$$ β -positivity defined by PET and CSF. Results Cross-validated AUC for 4-year A $$\beta$$ β conversion prediction was 0.78 for the CSF-based and 0.68 for the PET-based A $$\beta$$ β definitions. Although not trained for the clinical status-change prediction, the CSF-based model excelled in predicting future mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/dementia conversion in cognitively normal/MCI individuals (AUCs, respectively, 0.76 and 0.89 with a separate dataset). Conclusion Standard measures have potential in detecting future A $$\beta$$ β -positivity and assessing conversion risk, even in cognitively normal individuals. The CSF-based definition led to better predictions than the PET-based definition.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".