MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1685527554 · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2015.09.004

Hidden Markov model using Dirichlet process for de-identification

2015· article· en· W1685527554 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Chen, Richard Cullen, Marshall Godwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersU.S. National Library of Medicine
KeywordsHidden Markov modelComputer scienceConditional random fieldArtificial intelligenceDirichlet processFeature (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Identification (biology)Machine learningDirichlet distributionHierarchical Dirichlet processVocabularyPattern recognition (psychology)Field (mathematics)Bayesian probabilityTopic modelLatent Dirichlet allocationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the 2014 i2b2/UTHealth de-identification challenge, we introduced a new non-parametric Bayesian hidden Markov model using a Dirichlet process (HMM-DP). The model intends to reduce task-specific feature engineering and to generalize well to new data. In the challenge we developed a variational method to learn the model and an efficient approximation algorithm for prediction. To accommodate out-of-vocabulary words, we designed a number of feature functions to model such words. The results show the model is capable of understanding local context cues to make correct predictions without manual feature engineering and performs as accurately as state-of-the-art conditional random field models in a number of categories. To incorporate long-range and cross-document context cues, we developed a skip-chain conditional random field model to align the results produced by HMM-DP, which further improved the performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical InformaticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207