MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402306698 · doi:10.18280/ts.410420

Alzheimer’s Disease Classification Using Wavelet-Based Image Features

2024· article· en· W4402306698 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neha Garg, Mahipal Singh Choudhry, Rajesh M. Bodade

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDelhi Technological University
KeywordsWaveletPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Wavelet transformContextual image classification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a big issue within a population of aged people.AD starts with cognitive decline initially and creates miserable conditions for patients with time.One of the best preventive measures to control AD is its early detection at the Mild Cognitive Impairment (MiCI) stage.The MiCI is a transition stage between normal ageing and AD.The MiCI stage refers to the noticeable decline in cognitive abilities of a patient, that is more pronounced than would be expected for his age but not severe enough to substantially affect his daily life.Early detection at MiCI stage allows for prompt intervention and medication, which can help manage symptoms more effectively.This paper proposed a new feature extraction technique namely, Wavelet-based Shifted Circular-Elliptical Local Descriptors (WSCELD) for early AD detection.The proposed WSCELD combines the Double-Density Dual-Tree Complex Wavelet Transform (DD-DTCWT) with the shifted elliptical and circular local binary patterns for extracting directional and structural features in terms of multiple micro and macro patterns.The histogram features are obtained from transform domain images using the proposed WSCELD and have been used for classification.Different variants of WSCELD viz.Mean WSCELD, Median WSCELD, Energy WSCELD and Variance WSCELD have been investigated and Energy WSCELD has been proposed.Experimental results show the Energy WSCELD as the best performer with classification accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 97.31.6%,97.11.2% and 97.21.1% for AD/Normal Controls (NoC) classification, 94.61.1%,96.11.2% and 93.11.1% for AD/MiCI classification and 93.81.4%,92.41.5% and 96.21.2% for MiCI/NoC classification respectively.The proposed approach is the automated approach for AD detection and is suitable for clinical implementation for early AD detection.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207