An integrated machine learning framework for a discriminative analysis of schizophrenia using multi-biological data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Finding effective and objective biomarkers to inform the diagnosis of schizophrenia is of great importance yet remains challenging. Relatively little work has been conducted on multi-biological data for the diagnosis of schizophrenia. In this cross-sectional study, we extracted multiple features from three types of biological data, including gut microbiota data, blood data, and electroencephalogram data. Then, an integrated framework of machine learning consisting of five classifiers, three feature selection algorithms, and four cross validation methods was used to discriminate patients with schizophrenia from healthy controls. Our results show that the support vector machine classifier without feature selection using the input features of multi-biological data achieved the best performance, with an accuracy of 91.7% and an AUC of 96.5% (p < 0.05). These results indicate that multi-biological data showed better discriminative capacity for patients with schizophrenia than single biological data. The top 5% discriminative features selected from the optimal model include the gut microbiota features (Lactobacillus, Haemophilus, and Prevotella), the blood features (superoxide dismutase level, monocyte-lymphocyte ratio, and neutrophil count), and the electroencephalogram features (nodal local efficiency, nodal efficiency, and nodal shortest path length in the temporal and frontal-parietal brain areas). The proposed integrated framework may be helpful for understanding the pathophysiology of schizophrenia and developing biomarkers for schizophrenia using multi-biological data.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".