Review and classification of variability analysis techniques with clinical applications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of patterns of variation of time-series, termed variability analysis, represents a rapidly evolving discipline with increasing applications in different fields of science. In medicine and in particular critical care, efforts have focussed on evaluating the clinical utility of variability. However, the growth and complexity of techniques applicable to this field have made interpretation and understanding of variability more challenging. Our objective is to provide an updated review of variability analysis techniques suitable for clinical applications. We review more than 70 variability techniques, providing for each technique a brief description of the underlying theory and assumptions, together with a summary of clinical applications. We propose a revised classification for the domains of variability techniques, which include statistical, geometric, energetic, informational, and invariant. We discuss the process of calculation, often necessitating a mathematical transform of the time-series. Our aims are to summarize a broad literature, promote a shared vocabulary that would improve the exchange of ideas, and the analyses of the results between different studies. We conclude with challenges for the evolving science of variability analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it