MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2929353344 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2908032

Enhancing Predictive Power of Cluster-Boosted Regression With Text-Based Indexing

2019· article· en· W2929353344 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Chignell, Nipon Charoenkitkarn, Jonathan H. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersKing Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceSearch engine indexingBigramCurse of dimensionalitySupport vector machineWord (group theory)RegressionPrincipal component analysisData miningMachine learningRegression analysisPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsMathematicsTrigram

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clustering prior to regression analysis improves the accuracy of prediction in clinical decision making. However, most previously described methods focused on numerical data only. This paper investigated how well textual features can improve the accuracy of regression predictions. Preliminary diagnosis, diagnosis summary, and drug names used in prescriptions as provided in the MIMIC II dataset were used to derive textual features. We proposed the bag-of-entities indexing method, which relies on named entity recognition, a machine learning technique used for locating and identifying words into predefined classes. The proposed technique captured meaningful phrases from texts in health records and represented them in numerical vector format. Dimensionality of the data space was reduced using principal component analysis. The additional well-tuned textual features were then combined with existing numerical features in using cluster-boosted regression to predict patient mortality in ICU. The experimental results showed prediction improvement obtained from textual features over the use of numerical features only. We found that using the proposed indexing method outperformed traditional word-vector representation approaches (bag-of-words and bag-of-bigrams) as well as a state-of-the-art approach (Doc2vec) in terms of resulting accuracy in predicting death status. Moreover, instead of directly interpreting, the identifiable individual features were grouped into types and summarized. The summarized de-identified data of textual features handled by the proposed framework can support predictive classification while also reducing privacy concerns. Grouping of similar patients based on their electronic health records also benefits physicians through the improved differential diagnosis and effective treatment planning.

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 score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207