MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997263829 · doi:10.3166/ria.18.169-193

Réseaux bayésiens pour la classification Méthodologie et illustration dans le cadre du diagnostic médical

2004· article· fr· W1997263829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesForestryGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les reseaux bayesiens sont des outils privilegies pour les problemes de diagnostic. Nous dressons dans cet article un panorama des algorithmes utilises classiquement pour la mise en oeuvre des reseaux bayesiens dans le cadre du diagnostic, et plus particulierement du diagnostic medical. Pour cela, nous passons en revue un certain nombre de questions methodologiques concernant le choix de la representation des densites de probabilite (faut-il discretiser les variables continues ? utiliser un modele gaussien ?) et surtout la determination de la structure du reseau bayesien (faut-il utiliser un reseau naif ou essayer d'apprendre une meilleure structure a l'aide d'un expert ou de donnees ?). Une etude de cas concernant le diagnostic de cancer de la thyroide nous permettra d'illustrer une partie de ces interrogations et des solutions proposees.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.159 · 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