MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395099282 · doi:10.47611/jsrhs.v12i4.5843

Diagnosing Alzheimer’s Disease and Frontotemporal Dementia Using Machine Learning and EEG

2023· article· en· W4395099282 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontotemporal dementiaDementiaDiseaseElectroencephalographyPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineCognitive psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are types of neurodegenerative dementias characterized by progressive cognitive decline. Electroencephalography (EEG) signal analysis is becoming a promising, inexpensive method to early diagnose AD and FTD. Prior research has applied machine learning to classify AD and healthy patients (HC) based on EEG readings, but not distinguishing between AD, FTD, and healthy patients. In the present paper, power spectral features will be extracted from raw EEG recordings for random forest classifiers and artificial neural networks to differentiate among AD, FTD, and HC patients. The first two minutes of 88 EEG recordings were used from the 2nd Department of Neurology in Thessaloniki. The models achieved 96%, 92%, and 95% accuracy when dealing with binary classification problems (AD and HC, AD and FTD, HC and FTD) and 90.4% for all three classes. The accuracies improve upon the results of previous literature.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.321
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.149 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it