MRI-based and metabolomics-based age scores act synergetically for mortality prediction shown by multi-cohort federated learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biological age scores are an emerging tool to characterize aging by estimating chronological age based on physiological biomarkers. Various scores have shown associations with aging-related outcomes. This study assessed the relation between an age score based on brain MRI images (BrainAge) and an age score based on metabolomic biomarkers (MetaboAge). We trained a federated deep learning model to estimate BrainAge in three cohorts. The federated BrainAge model yielded significantly lower error for age prediction across the cohorts than locally trained models. Harmonizing the age interval between cohorts further improved BrainAge accuracy. Subsequently, we compared BrainAge with MetaboAge using federated association and survival analyses. The results showed a small association between BrainAge and MetaboAge as well as a higher predictive value for the time to mortality of both scores combined than for the individual scores. Hence, our study suggests that both aging scores capture different aspects of the aging process.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".