MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410453527 · doi:10.3389/fncom.2025.1560064

Interpretable machine learning for precision cognitive aging

2025· article· en· W4410453527 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdoul Jalil Djiberou Mahamadou, Emma A. Rodrigues, Vasily A. Vakorin, Violaine Antoine, Sylvain Moreno

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsFraser HealthRoyal Columbian HospitalSimon Fraser University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsInterpretabilityMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCognitionSupport vector machineRandom forestLogistic regressionRegressionArtificial neural networkGradient boostingPredictive modellingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Machine performance has surpassed human capabilities in various tasks, yet the opacity of complex models limits their adoption in critical fields such as healthcare. Explainable AI (XAI) has emerged to address this by enhancing transparency and trust in AI decision-making. However, a persistent gap exists between interpretability and performance, as black-box models, such as deep neural networks, often outperform white-box models, such as regression-based approaches. To bridge this gap, the Explainable Boosting Machine (EBM), a class of generalized additive models has been introduced, combining the strengths of interpretable and high-performing models. EBM may be particularly well-suited for cognitive health research, where traditional models struggle to capture nonlinear effects in cognitive aging and account for inter- and intra-individual variability. Methods: This cross-sectional study applies EBM to investigate the relationship between demographic, environmental, and lifestyle factors, and cognitive performance in a sample of 3,482 healthy older adults. The EBM's performance is compared against Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machines, Random Forests, Multilayer Perceptron, and Extreme Gradient Boosting, evaluating predictive accuracy and interpretability. Results: The findings reveal that EBM provides valuable insights into cognitive aging, surpassing traditional models while maintaining competitive accuracy with more complex machine learning approaches. Notably, EBM highlights variations in how lifestyle activities impact cognitive performance, particularly differences between engaging in and refraining from specific activities, challenging regression-based assumptions. Moreover, our results show that the effects of lifestyle factors are heterogeneous across cognitive groups, with some individuals demonstrating significant cognitive changes while others remain resilient to these influences. Discussion: These findings highlight EBM's potential in cognitive aging research, offering both interpretability and accuracy to inform personalized strategies for mitigating cognitive decline. By bridging the gap between explainability and performance, this study advances the use of XAI in healthcare and cognitive aging research.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Computational NeuroscienceSame topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207