MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395668377 · doi:10.1002/brx2.57

Comprehensive review of Transformer‐based models in neuroscience, neurology, and psychiatry

2024· article· en· W4395668377 on OpenAlexaff
Shan Cong, Hang Wang, Yang Zhou, Zheng Wang, Xiaohui Yao, Chunsheng Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain‐X · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningNeuroscienceTransformerComputer scienceCognitive scienceComputational neuroscienceCognitionAdaptabilityNeurologyArchitectureClinical neuroscienceCognitive neuroscienceNeuroinformaticsData sciencePsychologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This comprehensive review aims to clarify the growing impact of Transformer‐based models in the fields of neuroscience, neurology, and psychiatry. Originally developed as a solution for analyzing sequential data, the Transformer architecture has evolved to effectively capture complex spatiotemporal relationships and long‐range dependencies that are common in biomedical data. Its adaptability and effectiveness in deciphering intricate patterns within medical studies have established it as a key tool in advancing our understanding of neural functions and disorders, representing a significant departure from traditional computational methods. The review begins by introducing the structure and principles of Transformer architectures. It then explores their applicability, ranging from disease diagnosis and prognosis to the evaluation of cognitive processes and neural decoding. The specific design modifications tailored for these applications and their subsequent impact on performance are also discussed. We conclude by providing a comprehensive assessment of recent advancements, prevailing challenges, and future directions, highlighting the shift in neuroscientific research and clinical practice towards an artificial intelligence‐centric paradigm, particularly given the prominence of Transformer architecture in the most successful large pre‐trained models. This review serves as an informative reference for researchers, clinicians, and professionals who are interested in understanding and harnessing the transformative potential of Transformer‐based models in neuroscience, neurology, and psychiatry.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain‐XSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207