An Integrated Machine Learning Approach to Optimize the Estimation of Preterm Birth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis describes a new methodology used in conjunction with artificial intelligence tools to create multiple models for prediction of preterm birth in obstetrical environments.The data mining approach integrates: Decision Trees (DTs), Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) -specifically a Feed Forward Back Propagation ANN, and Case Based Reasoning System (CBRS).This work also introduces a 5by2 cross validation method, assesses two methods of attribute selection, and considers data prevalence (15% and 8.1%) in training and testing networks.Two databases were assessed from two countries: BORN (Canada) and PRAMS (USA).Best BORN results used selection method 2, had sensitivities of 50.53%, 53.96%, specificities of 91.61%, 95.40%, and area under curves (AUC) of 0.7721, 0.7970 for Parous and Nulliparous cases respectively.Best PRAMS results used selection method 1, had sensitivities of 68.15%, 40.35%, specificities of 64.71%, 94.57%, and area under curves (AUC) of 0.8452, 0.7064 for Parous and Nulliparous cases respectively.iii Above all, challenge yourself.You may well surprise yourself at what strengths you have, what you can accomplish.-Cecile Springer First and foremost, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my thesis supervisor, Dr. Monique Frize
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".