Building a Human Digital Twin (HDTwin) Using Large Language Models for Cognitive Diagnosis: Algorithm Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human digital twins have the potential to change the practice of personalizing cognitive health diagnosis because these systems can integrate multiple sources of health information and influence into a unified model. Cognitive health is multifaceted, yet researchers and clinical professionals struggle to align diverse sources of information into a single model. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to introduce a method called HDTwin, for unifying heterogeneous data using large language models. HDTwin is designed to predict cognitive diagnoses and offer explanations for its inferences. METHODS: HDTwin integrates cognitive health data from multiple sources, including demographic, behavioral, ecological momentary assessment, n-back test, speech, and baseline experimenter testing session markers. Data are converted into text prompts for a large language model. The system then combines these inputs with relevant external knowledge from scientific literature to construct a predictive model. The model's performance is validated using data from 3 studies involving 124 participants, comparing its diagnostic accuracy with baseline machine learning classifiers. RESULTS: HDTwin achieves a peak accuracy of 0.81 based on the automated selection of markers, significantly outperforming baseline classifiers. On average, HDTwin yielded accuracy=0.77, precision=0.88, recall=0.63, and Matthews correlation coefficient=0.57. In comparison, the baseline classifiers yielded average accuracy=0.65, precision=0.86, recall=0.35, and Matthews correlation coefficient=0.36. The experiments also reveal that HDTwin yields superior predictive accuracy when information sources are fused compared to single sources. HDTwin's chatbot interface provides interactive dialogues, aiding in diagnosis interpretation and allowing further exploration of patient data. CONCLUSIONS: HDTwin integrates diverse cognitive health data, enhancing the accuracy and explainability of cognitive diagnoses. This approach outperforms traditional models and provides an interface for navigating patient information. The approach shows promise for improving early detection and intervention strategies in cognitive health.
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 | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".