Studying Psychosis Using Natural Language Generation: A Review of Emerging Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disrupted language in psychotic disorders, such as schizophrenia, can manifest as false contents and formal deviations, often described as thought disorder. These features play a critical role in the social dysfunction associated with psychosis, but we continue to lack insights regarding how and why these symptoms develop. Natural language generation (NLG) is a field of computer science that focuses on generating human-like language for various applications. The theory that psychosis is related to the evolution of language in humans suggests that NLG systems that are sufficiently evolved to generate human-like language may also exhibit psychosis-like features. In this conceptual review, we propose using NLG systems that are at various stages of development as in silico tools to study linguistic features of psychosis. We argue that a program of in silico experimental research on the network architecture, function, learning rules, and training of NLG systems can help us understand better why thought disorder occurs in patients. This will allow us to gain a better understanding of the relationship between language and psychosis and potentially pave the way for new therapeutic approaches to address this vexing challenge.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".