Adaptive data-driven selection of sequences of biological and cognitive markers in pre-clinical diagnosis of dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective clinical decision procedures must balance multiple competing objectives such as time-to-decision, acquisition costs, and accuracy. We describe and evaluate POSEIDON, a data-driven method for PrOspective SEquentIal DiagnOsis with Neutral zones to individualize clinical classifications. We evaluated the framework with an application in which the algorithm sequentially proposes to include cognitive, imaging, or molecular markers if a sufficiently more accurate prognosis of clinical decline to manifest Alzheimer's disease is expected. Over a wide range of cost parameter data-driven tuning lead to quantitatively lower total cost compared to ad hoc fixed sets of measurements. The classification accuracy based on all longitudinal data from participants that was acquired over 4.8 years on average was 0.89. The sequential algorithm selected 14 percent of available measurements and concluded after an average follow-up time of 0.74 years at the expense of 0.05 lower accuracy. Sequential classifiers were competitive from a multi-objective perspective since they could dominate fixed sets of measurements by making fewer errors using less resources. Nevertheless, the trade-off of competing objectives depends on inherently subjective prescribed cost parameters. Thus, despite the effectiveness of the method, the implementation into consequential clinical applications will remain controversial and evolve around the choice of cost parameters.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 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".