MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155181784 · doi:10.3217/jucs-014-16-2720

Intelligent decision support in medicine: back to Bayes?

2008· article· en· W2155181784 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBayes' theoremArtificial intelligenceDecision support systemNaive Bayes classifierIntelligent decision support systemMachine learningData scienceBayesian probabilitySupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision Support Systems are proliferating rapidly in many areas of human endeavour including clinical medicine and psychology. While these are typically based on rule-based systems, decision trees, or Artificial Neural Networks, this paper argues that Bayes' Theorem can be applied fruitfully to support expert decisions both in dynamically changing situations requiring the system progressively to adapt, and when this is not the case. One example of each of these two types is given. One provides diagnostic support for human decision makers; the other, an e-health mental intervention system provides decision rules enabling it to respond and provide the most appropriate training modules to input from clients with changing needs. The contributions of psychological research underlying both systems is summarized.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.288 · 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