MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183267169 · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giab055

Preventing dataset shift from breaking machine-learning biomarkers

2021· review· en· W3183267169 on OpenAlexaff
Jérôme Dockès, Gaël Varoquaux, Jean‐Baptiste Poline

Bibliographic record

VenueGigaScience · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBiomarkerMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBiomarker discoveryPopulationMedicineBiologyProteomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning brings the hope of finding new biomarkers extracted from cohorts with rich biomedical measurements. A good biomarker is one that gives reliable detection of the corresponding condition. However, biomarkers are often extracted from a cohort that differs from the target population. Such a mismatch, known as a dataset shift, can undermine the application of the biomarker to new individuals. Dataset shifts are frequent in biomedical research, e.g., because of recruitment biases. When a dataset shift occurs, standard machine-learning techniques do not suffice to extract and validate biomarkers. This article provides an overview of when and how dataset shifts break machine-learning-extracted biomarkers, as well as detection and correction strategies.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations92
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGigaScienceSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207