Early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment using MRI analysis and machine learning algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is crucial to prevent their progression. In this study, we proposed the analysis of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based on features including; hippocampus (HC) area size, HC grayscale statistics and texture features (mean, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, contrast, correlation, energy, homogeneity, entropy), lateral ventricle (LV) area size, gray matter area size, white matter area size, cerebrospinal fluid area size, patient age, weight, and cognitive score. Five machine learning classifiers; K-nearest neighborhood (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), decision tree (DT), and multi-layer perception (MLP) were used to distinguish between groups: cognitively normal (CN) vs AD, early MCI (EMCI) vs late MCI (LMCI), CN vs EMCI, CN vs LMCI, AD vs EMCI, and AD vs LMCI. Additionally, the correlation and dependence were calculated to examine the strength and direction of association between each extracted feature and each classification of the group. The average classification accuracies in 20 trials were 95% (SVM), 71.50% (RF), 82.58% (RF), 84.91% (SVM), 85.83% (RF), and 85.08% (RF), respectively, with the best accuracies being 100% (SVM, RF, and MLP), 83.33% (RF), 91.66% (RF), 95% (SVM, and MLP), 96.66% (RF), and 93.33% (DT). Cognitive scores, HC and LV area sizes, and HC texture features demonstrated significant potential for diagnosing AD and its subtypes for all groups. RF and SVM showed better performance in distinguishing between groups. These findings highlight the importance of using 2D-MRI to identify key features containing critical information for early diagnosis of AD. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42452-024-06440-w.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".