Multilayer meta-matching: Translating phenotypic prediction models from multiple datasets to small data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) is widely used to predict phenotypic traits in individuals. Large sample sizes can significantly improve prediction accuracies. However, for studies of certain clinical populations or focused neuroscience inquiries, small-scale datasets often remain a necessity. We have previously proposed a "meta-matching" approach to translate prediction models from large datasets to predict new phenotypes in small datasets. We demonstrated a large improvement over classical kernel ridge regression (KRR) when translating models from a single source dataset (UK Biobank) to the Human Connectome Project Young Adults (HCP-YA) dataset. In the current study, we propose two meta-matching variants ("meta-matching with dataset stacking" and "multilayer meta-matching") to translate models from multiple source datasets across disparate sample sizes to predict new phenotypes in small target datasets. We evaluate both approaches by translating models trained from five source datasets (with sample sizes ranging from 862 participants to 36,834 participants) to predict phenotypes in the HCP-YA and HCP-Aging datasets. We find that multilayer meta-matching modestly outperforms meta-matching with dataset stacking. Both meta-matching variants perform better than the original "meta-matching with stacking" approach trained only on the UK Biobank. All meta-matching variants outperform classical KRR and transfer learning by a large margin. In fact, KRR is better than classical transfer learning when less than 50 participants are available for finetuning, suggesting the difficulty of classical transfer learning in the very small sample regime. The multilayer meta-matching model is publicly available athttps://github.com/ThomasYeoLab/Meta_matching_models/tree/main/rs-fMRI/v2.0.
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 | 0.011 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".