MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271015133

An Automated Machine Learning Approach Applied to Robotic Stroke Rehabilitation

2012· article· en· W2271015133 on OpenAlexaff
Jasper Snoek, Babak Taati, Alex Mihailidis

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAutoencoderPopulationHealth careDeep learningMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While machine learning methods have proven to be a highly valuable tool in solving numerous problems in assistive technology, state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms and corresponding results are not always accessible to assistive technology researchers due to required domain knowledge and complicated model parameters. This short paper highlights the use of recent work in machine learning to entirely automate the machine learning pipeline, from feature extraction to classification. A nonparametrically guided autoencoder is used to extract features and perform classification while Bayesian optimization is used to automatically tune the parameters of the model for best performance. Empirical analysis is performed on a real-world rehabilitation research problem. The entirely automated approach significantly outperforms previously published results using carefully tuned machine learning algorithms on the same data. As better healthcare worldwide is improving longevity and the baby boomer generation is aging, the proportion of elderly adults within the population is rapidly growing. Healthcare systems and governments are seeking new ways to alleviate the burden on society of caring for this aging population. Artificial intelligence has been shown to be a promising solution, as many of the simpler tasks that burden caregivers can be automated. This also suggests solutions for promoting independence and aging in place, because it alleviates the need for the constant presence of a caregiver in the home. The benefits of the application of machine learning to problems in assistive technology are becoming ever more clear. However, the application of machine learning to problems in assistive technology remains challenging. In particular, it is often unclear what machine learning model or approach is most appropriate for a given task. A common paradigm is to apply multiple standard machine learning tools in a black box manner and compare the results. This proceeds according to the following steps: 1. Collect data representative of the problem of interest. 2. Extract a set of features from these data. Copyright c 2012, Association for the Advancement of Artificial

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207