MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400931452 · doi:10.52362/ijiems.v2i2.1208

Application of the Certainty Factor Method for Diagnosing Mental Illness Disease

2023· article· en· W4400931452 on OpenAlexaff
Alta Mirah, Yani Maulita, Magdalena Simanjuntak

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Informatics Economics Management and Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTechnology and Human Factors in Education and Health
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertaintyMental illnessMental diseaseDiseaseFactor (programming language)PsychiatryPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceMental healthEpistemologyInternal medicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental illness is a disease that is widespread among Indonesian people. Mental illness, also known as mental health disorder, is a term that refers to various conditions that can affect a person's thoughts, moods, feelings or behavior. However, there are still many Indonesian people who do not recognize and indicate the existence of mental illness because many people do not pay attention to their mental health or those around them. the small number of psychiatrists available in each area and the costs required are also not small, causing ordinary people to be reluctant to carry out examinations with psychiatrists, this of course leads to delays in treatment which can even be fatal. To prevent the increase in sufferers of mental illness, a system is needed that can store the knowledge of experts or psychologists who understand how to handle mental illness. An expert expert system is an artificial intelligence program that combines a knowledge base with an inference system to emulate an expert. The certainty factor method is a method used to solve cases of uncertainty, where the size is based on a fact or rule that can be used in expert systems. With the existence of an expert system for diagnosing mental illness, the general public can recognize early symptoms of mental illness, so treatment can be done earlier. From the results of the trials conducted, the results of the mental illness expert system were obtained with the highest score, namely depression with a confidence value of 90.02%.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Informatics Economics Management and ScienceSame topicTechnology and Human Factors in Education and HealthFrench-language works237,207