Distributionally Robust Optimization methods on robust medical diagnosis systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the medical field, modern recommendation systems face significant challenges due to distributional shifts in data. We propose utilizing Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) and Distributionally and Outlier Robust Optimization (DORO) methods to address this issue. This paper aims to develop suitable DRO and DORO frameworks for the medical domain and validate their effectiveness through extensive experiments. We employ the DDXPlus dataset for our investigations and cluster patients based on age, sex, and initial evidence to partition the data into distinct distributions. Using a simple three-layer neural network, we incorporate CVaR and CHISQ as DRO methods and their respective DORO forms. The experimental results show that the overall DRO approach demonstrates more significant enhancements while all four methods exhibit improvements over the original distributional scenarios. Our research contributes to optimizing deep learning models in the medical domain and enhancing their robustness. Furthermore, we intend to use these methods to estimate and provide best-fit patient therapies, addressing real-world medical challenges. The application of these approaches has the potential to enhance the performance and practicality of medical recommendation systems, offering improved medical services to patients.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".