HiMAL: A Multimodal Hierarchical Multi-task Auxiliary Learning framework for predicting and explaining Alzheimer disease progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to develop and validate a novel multimodal framework HiMAL (Hierarchical, Multi-task Auxiliary Learning) framework, for predicting cognitive composite functions as auxiliary tasks that estimate the longitudinal risk of transition from Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer Disease (AD). Methods: HiMAL utilized multimodal longitudinal visit data including imaging features, cognitive assessment scores, and clinical variables from MCI patients in the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset, to predict at each visit if an MCI patient will progress to AD within the next 6 months. Performance of HiMAL was compared with state-of-the-art single-task and multi-task baselines using area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) and precision recall curve (AUPRC) metrics. An ablation study was performed to assess the impact of each input modality on model performance. Additionally, longitudinal explanations regarding risk of disease progression were provided to interpret the predicted cognitive decline. Results: Out of 634 MCI patients (mean [IQR] age : 72.8 [67-78], 60% men), 209 (32%) progressed to AD. HiMAL showed better prediction performance compared to all single-modality singe-task baselines (AUROC = 0.923 [0.915-0.937]; AUPRC= 0.623 [0.605-0.644]; all p<0.05). Ablation analysis highlighted that imaging and cognition scores with maximum contribution towards prediction of disease progression. Discussion: Clinically informative model explanations anticipate cognitive decline 6 months in advance, aiding clinicians in future disease progression assessment. HiMAL relies on routinely collected EHR variables for proximal (6 months) prediction of AD onset, indicating its translational potential for point-of-care monitoring and managing of high-risk patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".