Classification of Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy-Derived Biomarkers With Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To date, early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has mainly depended on paper-based neuropsychological assessments. Recently, biomarkers for MCI detection have gained a lot of attention because of the low sensitivity of neuropsychological assessments. This study proposed the functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS)-derived data with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to identify MCI. METHODS: Eighty-two subjects with MCI and 148 healthy controls (HC) performed the 2-back task, and their oxygenated hemoglobin (HbO2) changes in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) were recorded during the task. The CNN model based on fNIRS-derived spatial features with HbO2 slope within time windows was trained to classify MCI. Thereafter, the 5-fold cross-validation approach was used to evaluate the performance of the CNN model. RESULTS: Significant differences in averaged HbO2 values between MCI and HC groups were found, and the CNN model could better discriminate MCI with over 89.57% accuracy than the Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (89.57%). Specifically, the CNN model based on HbO2 slope within the time window of 20-60 seconds from the left PFC (96.09%) achieved the highest accuracy. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the fNIRS-derived spatial features with CNNs could be a promising way for early detection of MCI as a surrogate for a conventional screening tool and demonstrate the superiority of the fNIRS-derived spatial features with CNNs to the MoCA.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".