MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971624958 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1909.01067

Multimodal Deep Learning for Mental Disorders Prediction from Audio Speech Samples

2019· preprint· en· W2971624958 on OpenAlexaff
Habibeh Naderi, Behrouz Haji Soleimani, Stan Matwin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEmbeddingLeverage (statistics)SalientDeep learningFeature learningTransfer of learningNatural language processingSpeech recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key features of mental illnesses are reflected in speech. Our research focuses on designing a multimodal deep learning structure that automatically extracts salient features from recorded speech samples for predicting various mental disorders including depression, bipolar, and schizophrenia. We adopt a variety of pre-trained models to extract embeddings from both audio and text segments. We use several state-of-the-art embedding techniques including BERT, FastText, and Doc2VecC for the text representation learning and WaveNet and VGG-ish models for audio encoding. We also leverage huge auxiliary emotion-labeled text and audio corpora to train emotion-specific embeddings and use transfer learning in order to address the problem of insufficient annotated multimodal data available. All these embeddings are then combined into a joint representation in a multimodal fusion layer and finally a recurrent neural network is used to predict the mental disorder. Our results show that mental disorders can be predicted with acceptable accuracy through multimodal analysis of clinical interviews.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207