Morphometric data fusion for early detection of alzheimer’s disease

Abstract. We present a morphometry method which uses brain models generated using Nonnegative Matrix Factorization (NMF) characterized by signatures calculated from perceptual features such as intensities, edges and orientations, of some regions obtained by comparing the models. Two different measur...

Full description

Autores:
Giraldo Franco, Diana Lorena
Tipo de recurso:
Fecha de publicación:
2015
Institución:
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Repositorio:
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Idioma:
spa
OAI Identifier:
oai:repositorio.unal.edu.co:unal/54346
Acceso en línea:
https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/54346
http://bdigital.unal.edu.co/49248/
Palabra clave:
6 Tecnología (ciencias aplicadas) / Technology
61 Ciencias médicas; Medicina / Medicine and health
62 Ingeniería y operaciones afines / Engineering
Alzheimer’s Disease
MRI
Morphometry
NMF
Pattern Recognition
KullbackLeibler Divergence
Earth Mover’s Distance
Enfermedad de Alzheimer
IRM,
Morfometría
NMF
Reconocimiento de Patrones
Divergencia de Kullback-Leibler
EMD
Rights
openAccess
License
Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional
Description
Summary:Abstract. We present a morphometry method which uses brain models generated using Nonnegative Matrix Factorization (NMF) characterized by signatures calculated from perceptual features such as intensities, edges and orientations, of some regions obtained by comparing the models. Two different measures are used to calculate volume-models distances in the regions of interest. The discerning power of these distances is tested by using them as features for a Support Vector Machine classifier. This work shows the usefulness of both measures as metrics in medical image applications when they are used in binary classification tasks. Our methodology was tested with two experimental groups extracted from a public brain MR dataset (OASIS), the classification between healthy subjects and patients with mild AD reveals an equal error rate (EER) measure which is better than previous approaches tested on the same dataset (0.1 in the former and 0.2 in the latter). When detecting very mild AD, our results (near to 75% of sensitivity and specificity) are comparable to the results with those approaches.