A comprehensive interpretable machine learning framework for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's disease diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An interpretable machine learning (ML) framework is introduced to enhance the diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) by ensuring robustness of the ML models' interpretations. The dataset used comprises volumetric measurements from brain MRI and genetic data from healthy individuals and patients with MCI/AD, obtained through the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. The existing class imbalance is addressed by an ensemble learning approach, while various attribution-based and counterfactual-based interpretability methods are leveraged towards producing diverse explanations related to the pathophysiology of MCI/AD. A unification method combining SHAP with counterfactual explanations assesses the interpretability techniques' robustness. The best performing model yielded 87.5% balanced accuracy and 90.8% F1-score. The attribution-based interpretability methods highlighted significant volumetric and genetic features related to MCI/AD risk. The unification method provided useful insights regarding those features' necessity and sufficiency, further showcasing their significance in MCI/AD diagnosis.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".