MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386156211 · doi:10.1080/10705511.2023.2234086

Deep Learning Generalized Structured Component Analysis: An Interpretable Artificial Neural Network Model with Composite Indexes

2023· article· en· W4386156211 on OpenAlexaff
Gyeongcheol Cho, Heungsun Hwang

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)Component analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFunction (biology)Flexibility (engineering)Artificial neural networkIndependent component analysisPredictive powerDeep learningMultivariate statisticsMachine learningPower (physics)MathematicsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generalized structured component analysis (GSCA) is a multivariate method for specifying and examining interrelationships between observed variables and components. Despite its data-analytic flexibility honed over the decade, GSCA always defines every component as a linear function of observed variables, which can be less optimal when observed variables for a component are nonlinearly related, often reducing the component’s predictive power. To address this issue, we combine deep learning and GSCA into a single framework to allow a component to be a nonlinear function of observed variables without specifying the exact functional form in advance. This new method, termed deep learning generalized structured component analysis (DL-GSCA), aims to maximize the predictive power of components while their directed or undirected network remains interpretable. Our real and simulated data analyses show that DL-GSCA produces components with greater predictive power than those from GSCA in the presence of nonlinear associations between observed variables per component.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary JournalSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207