MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199176488 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2021.700253

Machine Learning in Modeling of Mouse Behavior

2021· article· en· W3199176488 on OpenAlexafffund
Marjan Gharagozloo, Abdelaziz Amrani, Kevin Wittingstall, Andrew Hamilton-Wright, Denis Gris

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsRandom forestComputer scienceSupport vector machineArtificial intelligencePreprocessorMachine learningFeature (linguistics)Artificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Convolutional neural networkCurse of dimensionalityData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mouse behavior is a primary outcome in evaluations of therapeutic efficacy. Exhaustive, continuous, multiparametric behavioral phenotyping is a valuable tool for understanding the pathophysiological status of mouse brain diseases. Automated home cage behavior analysis produces highly granulated data both in terms of number of features and sampling frequency. Previously, we demonstrated several ways to reduce feature dimensionality. In this study, we propose novel approaches for analyzing 33-Hz data generated by CleverSys software. We hypothesized that behavioral patterns within short time windows are reflective of physiological state, and that computer modeling of mouse behavioral routines can serve as a predictive tool in classification tasks. To remove bias due to researcher decisions, our data flow is indifferent to the quality, value, and importance of any given feature in isolation. To classify day and night behavior, as an example application, we developed a data preprocessing flow and utilized logistic regression (LG), support vector machines (SVM), random forest (RF), and one-dimensional convolutional neural networks paired with long short-term memory deep neural networks (1DConvBiLSTM). We determined that a 5-min video clip is sufficient to classify mouse behavior with high accuracy. LG, SVM, and RF performed similarly, predicting mouse behavior with 85% accuracy, and combining the three algorithms in an ensemble procedure increased accuracy to 90%. The best performance was achieved by combining the 1DConv and BiLSTM algorithms yielding 96% accuracy. Our findings demonstrate that computer modeling of the home-cage ethome can clearly define mouse physiological state. Furthermore, we showed that continuous behavioral data can be analyzed using approaches similar to natural language processing. These data provide proof of concept for future research in diagnostics of complex pathophysiological changes that are accompanied by changes in behavioral profile.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207