A minimalistic approach to classifying Alzheimer’s disease using simple and extremely small convolutional neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a broad interest in deploying deep learning-based classification algorithms to identify individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) from healthy controls (HC) based on neuroimaging data, such as T1-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The goal of the current study is to investigate whether modern, flexible architectures such as EfficientNet provide any performance boost over more standard architectures. METHODS: MRI data was sourced from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and processed with a minimal preprocessing pipeline. Among the various architectures tested, the minimal 3D convolutional neural network SFCN stood out, composed solely of 3x3x3 convolution, batch normalization, ReLU, and max-pooling. We also examined the influence of scale on performance, testing SFCN versions with trainable parameters ranging from 720 up to 2.9 million. RESULTS: SFCN achieves a test ROC AUC of 96.0% while EfficientNet got an ROC AUC of 94.9 %. SFCN retained high performance down to 720 trainable parameters, achieving an ROC AUC of 91.4%. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: The SFCN is compared to DenseNet and EfficientNet as well as the results of other publications in the field. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that using the minimal 3D convolutional neural network SFCN with a minimal preprocessing pipeline can achieve competitive performance in AD classification, challenging the necessity of employing more complex architectures with a larger number of parameters. This finding supports the efficiency of simpler deep learning models for neuroimaging-based AD diagnosis, potentially aiding in better understanding and diagnosing Alzheimer's disease.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".