Supervised machine learning tools: a tutorial for clinicians
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
In an increasingly data-driven world, artificial intelligence is expected to be a key tool for converting big data into tangible benefits and the healthcare domain is no exception to this. Machine learning aims to identify complex patterns in multi-dimensional data and use these uncovered patterns to classify new unseen cases or make data-driven predictions. In recent years, deep neural networks have shown to be capable of producing results that considerably exceed those of conventional machine learning methods for various classification and regression tasks. In this paper, we provide an accessible tutorial of the most important supervised machine learning concepts and methods, including deep learning, which are potentially the most relevant for the medical domain. We aim to take some of the mystery out of machine learning and depict how machine learning models can be useful for medical applications. Finally, this tutorial provides a few practical suggestions for how to properly design a machine learning model for a generic medical problem.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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