Using deep-learning to obtain calibrated individual disease and ADL damage transition probabilities between successive ELSA waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We predictively model damage transition probabilities for binary health outputs of 19 diseases and 25 activities of daily living states (ADLs) between successive waves of the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA). Model selection between deep neural networks (DNN), random forests, and logistic regression found that a simple one-hidden layer 128-node DNN was best able to predict future health states (AUC ≥ 0.91) and average damage probabilities ( R 2 ≥ 0.92). Feature selection from 134 explanatory variables found that 33 variables are sufficient to predict all disease and ADL states well. Deciles of predicted damage transition probabilities were well calibrated, but correlations between predicted health states were stronger than observed. The hazard ratios (HRs) between high-risk deciles and the average were between 3 and 10; high prevalence damage transitions typically had smaller HRs. Model predictions were good across all individual ages. A simple one-hidden layer DNN predicts multiple binary diseases and ADLs with well calibrated damage and repair transition probabilities.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".