AI-driven fusion of multimodal data for Alzheimer’s disease biomarker assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) diagnosis hinges on detecting amyloid beta (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tau (τ) tangles, typically assessed using PET imaging. While accurate, these modalities are expensive and not widely accessible, limiting their utility in routine clinical practice. Here, we present a multimodal computational framework that integrates data from seven distinct cohorts comprising 12, 185 participants to estimate individual PET profiles using more readily available neurological assessments. Our approach achieved an AUROC of 0.79 and 0.84 in classifying Aβ and τ status, respectively. Predicted PET status was consistent with various biomarker profiles and postmortem pathology, and model-identified regional brain volumes aligned with known spatial patterns of tau deposition. This approach can support scalable pre-screening of candidates for anti-amyloid therapies and clinical trials targeting Aβ and τ, offering a practical alternative to direct PET imaging. A flexible AI framework integrates multimodal neurology work-up data to estimate amyloid and tau burden, supporting scalable biomarker stratification for Alzheimer’s disease research and trial screening.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".