Manifold Alignment and Transfer Learning for Classification of Alzheimer’s Disease
Magnetic resonance (MR) images acquired at different field strengths have different intensity appearance and thus cannot be easily combined into a single manifold space. A framework to learn a joint low-dimensional representation of brain MR images, acquired either at 1.5 or 3 Tesla, is proposed. In this manifold subspace, knowledge can be shared and transfered between the two distinct but related datasets. The joint manifold subspace is built using an adaptation of Laplacian eigenmaps (LE) from a data-driven region of interest (ROI). The ROI is learned using sparse regression to perform simultaneous variable selection at multiple levels of alignment to the MNI152 template. Additionally, a stability selection re-sampling scheme is used to reduce sampling bias while learning the ROI. Knowledge about the intrinsic embedding coordinates of different instances, common to both feature spaces, is used to constrain their alignment in the joint manifold. Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) classification results obtained with the proposed approach are presented using data from more than 1500 subjects from ADNI-1, ADNI-GO and ADNI-2 datasets. Results calculated using the learned joint manifold in general outperform those obtained in each independent manifold. Accuracies calculated on ADNI-1 are comparable to other state-of-the-art approaches. To our knowledge, classification accuracies have not been reported before on the complete ADNI (-1, -GO and -2) cohort combined.
KeywordsMild Cognitive Impairment Locally Linear Embedding Cognitive Normal Magnetic Resonance Image Intensity Laplacian Eigenmaps
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Ho, A.J., Hua, X., Lee, S., Leow, A.D., Yanovsky, I., Gutman, B., Dinov, I.D., Leporé, N., Stein, J.L., Toga, A.W., Jack, C.R., Bernstein, M.A., Reiman, E.M., Harvey, D.J., Kornak, J., Schuff, N., Alexander, G.E., Weiner, M.W., Thompson, P.M.: Comparing 3 T and 1.5 T MRI for tracking Alzheimer’s disease progression with tensor-based morphometry. Human Brain Mapping 31(4), 499–514 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Wolz, R., Julkunen, V., Koikkalainen, J., Niskanen, E., Zhang, D.P., Rueckert, D., Soininen, H., Lötjönen, J.: Multi-method analysis of MRI images in early diagnostics of Alzheimer’s disease. PloS One 6(10), e25446 (2011)Google Scholar
- 6.Wang, C.: A geometric framework for transfer learning using manifold alignment. Ph.D Thesis (2010)Google Scholar
- 7.Ham, J., Lee, D., Saul, L.: Semi-supervised alignment of manifolds. In: 10th International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (2005)Google Scholar
- 8.Baumgartner, C.F., Kolbitsch, C., McClelland, J.R., Rueckert, D., King, A.P.: Groupwise simultaneous manifold alignment for high-resolution dynamic MR imaging of respiratory motion. In: Gee, J.C., Joshi, S., Pohl, K.M., Wells, W.M., Zöllei, L. (eds.) IPMI 2013. LNCS, vol. 7917, pp. 232–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Belkin, M., Niyogi, P.: Laplacian eigenmaps and spectral techniques for embedding and clustering. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 585–591 (2002)Google Scholar
- 12.Heckemann, R.A., Ledig, C., Aljabar, P., Gray, K.R., Rueckert, D., Hajnal, J.V., Hammers, A.: Label propagation using group agreement – DISPATCH. In: MICCAI 2012 Grand Challenge and Workshop on Multi-Atlas Labeling, pp. 75–78 (2012)Google Scholar