Back

When Color Adds Nothing: A Causal Audit of Channel Triplication in Alzheimer's MRI Classification

Singhvi, S.; Singhvi, R.

2026-07-08 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.07.07.737073 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Medical imaging pipelines routinely copy single-channel grayscale data into three identical RGB channels before classification, usually without justification. This study tests whether that step affects model predictions. Four coordinated experiments on bit-identical RGB inputs sorted eleven classical machine learning models into three groups: five that were invariant to the copy, two that were nearly invariant, and four whose predictions changed. On the Kaggle Alzheimer MRI Dataset (6,400 images, four classes, five seeds), five models (AdaBoost, HistGradientBoosting, KNN, SVM_Polynomial, and SVM_RBF) produced identical predictions in both conditions for every seed, where KNN is k-nearest neighbors and SVM a support vector machine, with polynomial and radial basis function (RBF) kernels. Two models (GaussianNB and SVM_Linear) differed by at most one of 1,280 samples, a dataset-dependent gap rather than exact invariance. The remaining four (DecisionTree, ExtraTrees, RandomForest, and LogisticRegression) differed substantively. A regularization sweep on Logistic Regression traced its gap to a single cause. As L2 regularization weakened, the color-minus-grayscale macro F1 gap shrank steadily, from +12.07 percentage points at C=0.001 to near zero at C=100 (paired Wilcoxon p=0.0020 under strong regularization), showing the effect scales with feature count rather than image content. A replication on the OASIS dataset, matched in size and class balance, reproduced every grouping, and the Logistic Regression gap reappeared in the same direction at smaller magnitude (+5.30 points macro F1). Two deep networks, ResNet18 and DenseNet121, gave identical predictions across all twenty paired conditions. Channel triplication left most models unchanged while multiplying classical training time 2.3 to 4.0 times without benefit.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Imaging Neuroscience
282 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
10.9%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.1%
3
Human Brain Mapping
329 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
8.1%
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 8%
7.5%
5
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
5.6%
6
Nature Neuroscience
252 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.3%
7
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.3%
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.5%
50% of probability mass above
9
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.0%
10
Nature Machine Intelligence
70 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
11
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
12
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
Brain Communications
166 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Bioengineering
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
15
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
16
NeuroImage: Clinical
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
17
Journal of Neural Engineering
221 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
18
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
19
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.2%
20
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.2%
21
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
22
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
23
Hippocampus
56 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
24
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
25
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
242 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
26
Brain
168 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
27
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.9%
28
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
29
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
30
Nature Biomedical Engineering
47 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%