Medical Concept Embedding with Multiple Ontological Representations
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
Learning representations of medical concepts from the Electronic Health Records (EHR) has been shown effective for predictive analytics in healthcare. Incorporation of medical ontologies has also been explored to further enhance the accuracy and to ensure better alignment with the known medical knowledge. Most of the existing work assumes that medical concepts under the same ontological category should share similar representations, which however does not always hold. In particular, the categorizations in medical ontologies were established with various factors being considered. Medical concepts even under the same ontological category may not follow similar occurrence patterns in the EHR data, leading to contradicting objectives for the representation learning. In this paper, we propose a deep learning model called MMORE which alleviates this conflicting objective issue by allowing multiple representations to be inferred for each ontological category via an attention mechanism. We apply MMORE to diagnosis prediction and our experimental results show that the representations obtained by MMORE can achieve better predictive accuracy and result in clinically meaningful sub-categorization of the existing ontological categories.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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