MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410188329 · doi:10.4258/hir.2025.31.2.125

Developing an Explainable Artificial Intelligence System for the Mobile-Based Diagnosis of Febrile Diseases Using Random Forest, LIME, and GPT

2025· article· en· W4410188329 on OpenAlexaff
Kingsley Attai, Constance Amannah, Moses E. Ekpenyong, Daniel Asuquo, Oryina Kingsley Akputu, Okure Obot, Peterben Ajuga, Omosivie Maduka, Christie Akwaowo, Faith‐Michael Uzoka

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Informatics Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom forestComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicineBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study proposes a mobile-based explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) platform designed for diagnosing febrile illnesses. METHODS: We integrated the interpretability offered by local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) and the explainability provided by generative pre-trained transformers (GPT) to bridge the gap in understanding and trust often created by machine learning models in critical healthcare decision-making. The developed system employed random forest for disease diagnosis, LIME for interpretation of the results, and GPT-3.5 for generating explanations in easy-to-understand language. RESULTS: Our model demonstrated robust performance in detecting malaria, achieving precision, recall, and F1-scores of 85%, 91%, and 88%, respectively. It performed moderately well in detecting urinary tract and respiratory tract infections, with precision, recall, and F1-scores of 80%, 65%, and 72%, and 77%, 68%, and 72%, respectively, maintaining an effective balance between sensitivity and specificity. However, the model exhibited limitations in detecting typhoid fever and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome, achieving lower precision, recall, and F1-scores of 69%, 53%, and 60%, and 75%, 39%, and 51%, respectively. These results indicate missed true-positive cases, necessitating further model fine-tuning. LIME and GPT-3.5 were integrated to enhance transparency and provide natural language explanations, thereby aiding decision-making and improving user comprehension of the diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The LIME plots revealed key symptoms influencing the diagnoses, with bitter taste in the mouth and fever showing the highest negative influence on predictions, and GPT-3.5 provided natural language explanations that increased the reliability and trustworthiness of the system, promoting improved patient outcomes and reducing the healthcare burden.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Informatics ResearchSame topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207