Adversarial Learning on Incomplete and Imbalanced Medical Data for Robust Survival Prediction of Liver Transplant Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scarcity of liver transplants necessitates prioritizing patients based on their health condition to minimize deaths on the waiting list. Recently, machine learning methods have gained popularity for automatizing liver transplant allocation systems, which enables prompt and suitable selection of recipients. Nevertheless, raw medical data often contain complexities such as missing values and class imbalance that reduce the reliability of the constructed model. This paper aims at eliminating the respective challenges to ensure the reliability of the decision-making process. To this aim, we first propose a novel deep learning method to simultaneously eliminate these challenges and predict the patients' survival chance. Secondly, a hybrid framework is designed that contains three main modules for missing data imputation, class imbalance learning, and classification, each of which employing multiple advanced techniques for the given task. Furthermore, these two approaches are compared and evaluated using a real clinical case study. The experimental results indicate the robust and superior performance of the proposed deep learning method in terms of F-measure and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".