Task relevant autoencoding enhances machine learning for human neuroscience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In human neuroscience, machine learning can help reveal lower-dimensional neural representations relevant to subjects' behavior. However, state-of-the-art models typically require large datasets to train, and so are prone to overfitting on human neuroimaging data that often possess few samples but many input dimensions. Here, we capitalized on the fact that the features we seek in human neuroscience are precisely those relevant to subjects' behavior rather than noise or other irrelevant factors. We thus developed a Task-Relevant Autoencoder via Classifier Enhancement (TRACE) designed to identify behaviorally-relevant target neural patterns. We benchmarked TRACE against a standard autoencoder and other models for two severely truncated machine learning datasets (to match the data typically available in functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI] data for an individual subject), then evaluated all models on fMRI data from 59 subjects who observed animals and objects. TRACE outperformed alternative models nearly unilaterally, showing up to 12% increased classification accuracy and up to 56% improvement in discovering "cleaner", task-relevant representations. These results showcase TRACE's potential for a wide variety of data related to human behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".