A review of AI-based radiogenomics in neurodegenerative disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurodegenerative diseases are chronic, progressive conditions that cause irreversible damage to the nervous system, particularly in aging populations. Early diagnosis is a critical challenge, as these diseases often develop slowly and without clear symptoms until significant damage has occurred. Recent advances in radiomics and genomics have provided valuable insights into the mechanisms of these diseases by identifying specific imaging features and genomic patterns. Radiogenomics enhances diagnostic capabilities by linking genomics with imaging phenotypes, offering a more comprehensive understanding of disease progression. The growing field of artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning and deep learning, opens new opportunities for improving the accuracy and timeliness of these diagnoses. This review examines the application of AI-based radiogenomics in neurodegenerative diseases, summarizing key model designs, performance metrics, publicly available data resources, significant findings, and future research directions. It provides a starting point and guidance for those seeking to explore this emerging area of study.
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it