MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Deep Learning Framework Based on DenseNet Architecture for Accurate Diagnosis of Neurodegenerative Diseases Using Multimodal Medical Imaging Data

2025· article· W7128713454 on OpenAlexaff
Ragini Y P, Ahmad Abdelhafiz Ali Samhan, T Aswani, B Rajalakshmi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep learningFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Confusion matrixMedical imagingPlot (graphics)Point (geometry)Clinical PracticeConfusion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a deep learning framework, which utilizes DenseNet structure, to diagnose neurodegenerative diseases using multimodal medical images accurately. The new design takes advantage of the efficient feature interdependency and gradients of DenseNet and uses them to enhance normal to abnormal brain status classification. The performance was analyzed at length with various indices. The model had an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.88 which implies high discriminatory power. The confusion matrix lifted a high level of true positive rate with minimum false negative rate especially in abnormal cases. To display the plot of the separability of classes in the feature space, the dimensionality reduction (PCA and t-SNE) were applied. Moreover, precision-recall analysis and training-validation curves proved the strength and generalizing of the model. The outcomes confirm the utility of DenseNet-related designs in healthcare diagnostics and point to the promise of the incorporation of deep learning in clinical practice in the early-stage diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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