MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112148660 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2004.1403276

Quantifying uncertainty bounds in anesthetic PKPD models

2005· article· en· W2112148660 on OpenAlexaff
S. Bibian, Guy A. Dumont, M. Huzmezan, Craig R. Ries

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStability (learning theory)PopulationComputer scienceAnestheticMathematical optimizationMathematicsControl (management)Control theory (sociology)Machine learningAnesthesiaArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major challenge faced when designing controllers to automate anesthetic drug delivery is the large variability that exists between and within patients. This intra- and inter-patient variability have been reported to lead to instability. Hence, defining and quantifying uncertainty bounds provides a mean to validate the control design, ensure its stability and assess performance. In this work, the intra- and inter-patient variability measured from thiopental induction data is used to define uncertainty bounds. It is shown that these bounds can be reduced by up to 40% when using a patient-specific model as compared to a population-normed model. It is also shown that identifying only the overall static gain of the patient system already decreases significantly this uncertainty.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207