Fidgety Philip and the Suggested Clinical Immobilization Test: Annotation data for developing a machine learning algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cartoon Fidgety Philip, the banner of Western-ADHD diagnosis, depicts a ‘restless’ child exhibiting hyperactive-behaviors with hyper-arousability and/or hypermotor-restlessness (H-behaviors) during sitting. To overcome the gaps between differential diagnostic considerations and modern computing methodologies, we have developed a non-interpretative, neutral pictogram-guided phenotyping language (PG-PL) for describing body-segment movements during sitting (Journal of Psychiatric Research). To develop the PG-PL, seven research assistants annotated three original Fidgety Philip cartoons. Their annotations were analyzed with descriptive statistics. To review the PG-PL's performance, the same seven research assistants annotated 12 snapshots with free hand annotations, followed by using the PG-PL, each time in randomized sequence and on two separate occasions. After achieving satisfactory inter-observer agreements, the PG-PL annotation software was used for reviewing videos where the same seven research assistants annotated 12 one-minute long video clips. The video clip annotations were finally used to develop a machine learning algorithm for automated movement detection (Journal of Psychiatric Research). These data together demonstrate the value of the PG-PL for manually annotating human movement patterns. Researchers are able to reuse the data and the first version of the machine learning algorithm to further develop and refine the algorithm for differentiating movement patterns.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".