Interactive e-Cube Games for Routine Cognitive Assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive assessments are important diagnostic and screening tools for cognitive conditions, such as mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). As the US population ages, the cost of AD will increase, resting at around $305 billion currently. Early diagnosis of dementia is the primary route for potentially decreasing this cost and increasing the quality of life of those afflicted. This thesis covers research on e-Cube Screening, an autonomous, routine cognitive assessment for early detection of MCI, which is often considered the prodromal phase of AD, in older adults. Following a preliminary study using the e-Cube Games technology on younger adults, e-Cube Screening is shortened and optimized for use on older adults. It consists of three games, Assembly, Shape-Matching, and Spatial-Memory. The ongoing evaluation study aims to evaluate the usability and preliminary validity of e-Cube Screening for cognitive assessment. In this study, the three e-Cube games are tested against and later compared to three subtests of the Fourth Edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (Block Design, Digit Span, and Matrix Reasoning), as well as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale. Preliminary usability evaluation on nine subjects showed e-Cube Screening is usable by older adults. Results from nine enrolled subjects are reported in this thesis.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".