MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Applying Transfer Learning Based Deep Models on Structural and Functional Brain Images to Predict Alzheimer's Disease

2025· article· W4417338320 on OpenAlexaff
Lilia Lazli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
KeywordsTransfer of learningConvolutional neural networkBenchmark (surveying)Deep learningFeature (linguistics)NeuroimagingFocus (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) destroys brain cells and can even cause death in older people. Therefore, diagnosis in the early stages is essential for proper treatment. Computer-aided diagnosis based on machine learning has become an accessible and suitable tool. However, the majority of traditional models focus on binary classification and utilize multi-step architectures, which are intricate and heavily reliant on human experts. This paper presents deep architectures that eliminate the need for handcrafted feature generation and significantly improve the process for accurate diagnosis. We design and train several enhanced convolutional neural networks (CNNs) based on transfer learning (TL) using smaller datasets to analyze neuroimaging scans and classify them into different AD stages. These CNNs are tested on the ADNI and OASIS benchmark datasets and found to outperform the best TL methods with regard to accuracy, precision, recall, f1-score and area under the ROC curve. The results show that NASNetLarge achieves finest performance, outperforming comparative models such as NASNet-Mobile, Inception-ResNetV2, and InceptionV3.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207