MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Annotated Dataset for Explainable Interpersonal Risk Factors of Mental Disturbance in Social Media Posts

2023· article· en· W4385570288 on OpenAlexaff
Muskan Garg, Amirmohammad Shahbandegan, Amrit Chadha, Vijay Mago

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaInterpersonal communicationConstruct (python library)Computer scienceMental illnessPsychologyMental healthData scienceApplied psychologyWorld Wide WebSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a surge in identifying suicidal risk and its severity in social media posts, we argue that a more consequential and explainable research is required for optimal impact on clinical psychology practice and personalized mental healthcare.The success of computational intelligence techniques for inferring mental illness from social media resources, points to natural language processing as a lens for determining Interpersonal Risk Factors (IRF) in human writings.Motivated with limited availability of datasets for social NLP research community, we construct and release a new annotated dataset with human-labelled explanations and classification of IRF affecting mental disturbance on social media: (i) Thwarted Belongingness (TBE), and (ii) Perceived Burdensomeness (PBU).We establish baseline models on our dataset facilitating future research directions to develop realtime personalized AI models by detecting patterns of TBE and PBU in emotional spectrum of user's historical social media 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207