MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976735567 · doi:10.60692/mexry-90t71

Identification and Classification of Alzheimer's Disease Patients Using Novel Fractional Motion Model

2020· article· en· W6976735567 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHurst exponentReceiver operating characteristicCorrelationPattern recognition (psychology)Diffusion MRIFractional Brownian motionDetrended fluctuation analysisExponent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of diffusion MRI (dMRI) techniques use the mono-exponential model to describe the diffusion process of water in the brain. However, the observed dMRI signal decay curve deviates from the mono-exponential form. To solve this problem, the fractional motion (FM) model has been developed, which was regarded to be a more appropriate model for describing the complex diffusion process in brain tissue. It is still unclear in the identification and classification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients using the FM model. The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential feasibility of FM model differentiating AD patients from healthy controls and grading patients with AD. Twenty four patients with AD and 11 healthy controls were included. The left and right hippocampus were selected as regions of interest (ROIs). The ADC values and FM-related parameters, including the Noah exponent (α), the Hurst exponent (Η), and the memory parameter (μ=Η-1/α), were calculated and compared between AD patients and healthy controls and between mild AD and moderate AD patients using a two-sample t-test. The correlations between FM-related parameters α, Η, μ, and ADC values and the cognitive functions assessed by mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scales were investigated using Pearson partial correlation analysis in patients with AD. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to assess the differential performance. We found that the FM-related parameter α could be used to distinguish AD patients from healthy controls (p<0.05) with greater sensitivity and specificity (left ROI, 0.917 and 0.636; right ROI, 0.917 and 0.727) and grade AD patients (p< 0.05) showed higher sensitivity and specificity (right ROI, 0.917, 0.75). The α was found to be positively correlated with MMSE (p<0.05) and MoCA (p<0.05) scores in patients with AD, indicating that the α values in the bilateral hippocampus were a potential MRI-based biomarker of disease severity in AD patients. This novel diffusion model may be useful for further understanding of neuropathologic changes in patients with AD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.169 · 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