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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".