Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Alzheimer’s related dementia severity classification from magnetic resonance imaging using derivative-free optimization of convolutional neural network
Saravana Kumar Ganesan, Parthasarathy Velusamy, Praveen Parthsarathy, Asokan Vasudevan. Scientific Reports, 2026-02-21
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Magnetic resonance imaging based dementia severity assessment facilitates timely diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) progression. While convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown effectiveness in classifying AD stages, their performance can be limited by high computational demands and class imbalance in training data. The article introduces a derivative-free optimization (DFO) approach by integrating evolutionary algorithms, Bayesian optimization, simulated annealing, neural architecture search, and pruning techniques to optimize both trainable parameters and network topology to design a lightweight CNN model (DAPA-CNN) for classifying brain MRI images into four Alzheimer-related Dementia stages (ARDS): non-Dementia (ND), mild Dementia (MD), very mild Dementia (VMD) and moderate Dementia (MoD). The proposed framework balances the dataset using Tomek links and deep SMOTE, and enhances model interpretability with class activation maps (CAMs). DAPA-CNN achieved an accuracy of 99.59% on the Alzheimer’s disease dataset (ADD), along with balanced precision (99.60%), sensitivity (99.66%), specificity (99.87%), and F1score (99.63%). across all classes. All class-wise dice and Jaccard indices and correlation metrics (Matthews correlation coefficient and Cohen’s Kappa) exceeded 0.99. Compared to a baseline CNN and contemporary architectures, DAPA-CNN reduces the number of parameters by 85.6%, processing time by 42.8%, and memory usage by 76.6%, making it suitable for resource-constrained clinical environments.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ganesan, S. K., Velusamy, P., Parthsarathy, P., & Vasudevan, A. (2026). Alzheimer’s related dementia severity classification from magnetic resonance imaging using derivative-free optimization of convolutional neural network. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-36037-9
Vancouver
Ganesan SK, Velusamy P, Parthsarathy P, Vasudevan A. Alzheimer’s related dementia severity classification from magnetic resonance imaging using derivative-free optimization of convolutional neural network. Scientific Reports. 2026. doi:10.1038/s41598-026-36037-9. PMID: 41723164.
BibTeX
@article{ganesan2026-41723164,
author = {Ganesan, Saravana Kumar and Velusamy, Parthasarathy and Parthsarathy, Praveen and Vasudevan, Asokan},
title = {{Alzheimer’s related dementia severity classification from magnetic resonance imaging using derivative-free optimization of convolutional neural network}},
journal = {Scientific Reports},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.1038/s41598-026-36037-9},
pmid = {41723164},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-36037-9}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Compared to a baseline CNN and contemporary architectures, DAPA-CNN reduces the number of parameters by 85.6%, processing time by 42.8%, and memory usage by 76.6%, making it suitable for resource-constrained clinical environments.
Why it matters
This study describes a computer model that classifies MRI scans into four dementia stages with high reported accuracy while using fewer parameters and less memory than other models. It is a technical classification study and does not test any treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Effect size99.59%; 99.60%; 99.66%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 41 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific Reports) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Scientific Reports: journal h-index 463 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 3 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 1 / 5 | 1.5 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 14.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 3 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Asokan Vasudevan holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | Karpagam Academy of Higher Education: institution h-index 128 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 3 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41723164) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 41 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-36037-9
- PubMed: 41723164
- Original source →
- Free full text: Scientific Reports →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “classification”
835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.