Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source3 min read

Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis

Summary

This study investigates fairness in deep survival models for Alzheimer's disease progression, proposing novel metrics to quantify bias and revealing considerable disparities based on sensitive attributes like sex, race, and education.

SourcearXiv Machine LearningAuthor: Jacob Thrasher, Kaitlyn Heintzelman, Peter Martone, David Kotlowski, Binod Bhattarai, Donald Adjeroh, Prashnna Gyawali
Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[2605.04063] Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis

Skip to main content

Learn about arXiv becoming an independent nonprofit.

We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate

> cs > arXiv:2605.04063

Help | Advanced Search

All fields Title Author Abstract Comments Journal reference ACM classification MSC classification Report number arXiv identifier DOI ORCID arXiv author ID Help pages Full text

Search

GO

quick links

Login

Help Pages

About

-->

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:2605.04063 (cs)

[Submitted on 10 Apr 2026]

Title:Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis

Authors:Jacob Thrasher, Kaitlyn Heintzelman, Peter Martone, David Kotlowski, Binod Bhattarai, Donald Adjeroh, Prashnna Gyawali

View a PDF of the paper titled Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis, by Jacob Thrasher and 6 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Alzheimer's Dementia (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease marked by irreversible decline, making reliable modeling of its progression essential for effective patient care. Progression-aware methods such as survival analysis are therefore crucial tools for the early detection and monitoring of AD. Recent advancements in deep learning have demonstrated remarkable performance in survival tasks, but alarmingly fewer studies have been conducted in the domain of AD. Further, the studies that do exist do not consider learned bias within the model itself, which could result in unfair and unreliable predictions toward certain marginalized groups. As such, we conduct a rigorous study of fairness in AD progression analysis along with a thorough feature importance study to determine the characteristics which are most important for reliable AD predictions. Furthermore, we propose two novel fairness metrics, called Time-Dependent Concordance Impurity and Kaplan-Meier Fairness, to quantify bias with respect to sensitive attributes such as sex, race, and education in nonparametric survival models. Our study demonstrates that while deep learning powered survival models are robust tools which can aid clinicians in AD care decisions, they often exhibit considerable bias, representing important avenues for future research.

Comments: 12 pages, 6 figures, 2 tables, IEEE/ACM Conference on Connected Health: Applications, Systems, and Engineering Technologies

Subjects:

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

Cite as: arXiv:2605.04063 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2605.04063v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.04063

Focus to learn more

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Jacob Thrasher [view email] [v1] Fri, 10 Apr 2026 16:41:48 UTC (1,224 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Investigating Trustworthiness of Nonparametric Deep Survival Models for Alzheimer's Disease Progression Analysis, by Jacob Thrasher and 6 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.LG

new | recent | 2026-05

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI cs.CY

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×

loading...

Data provided by:

Bookmark

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

IArxiv recommender toggle

IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

About

Help

contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact

subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe

Copyright

Privacy Policy

Web Accessibility Assistance

arXiv Operational Status

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • Deep survival models show potential for AD progression but suffer from bias.
  • Two new fairness metrics: Time-Dependent Concordance Impurity and Kaplan-Meier Fairness are proposed.
  • Models exhibit significant bias based on sex, race, and education.
  • Highlights need for fairness-aware AI in healthcare.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.