MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412514246 · doi:10.2196/77893

Magnitude and Impact of Hallucinations in Tabular Synthetic Health Data on Prognostic Machine Learning Models: Validation Study

2025· article· en· W4412514246 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Pilgram, Samer El Kababji, Khaled El Emam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyData scienceMachine learningMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) for tabular synthetic data generation (SDG) has significant potential to accelerate health care research and innovation. A critical limitation of generative AI, however, is hallucinations. Although this has been commonly observed in text-generating models, it may also occur in tabular SDG. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the magnitude of hallucinations in tabular synthetic data, whether their frequency increases with training data complexity, and the extent to which they impact the utility of synthetic data for downstream prognostic machine learning (ML) modeling tasks. METHODS: On the basis of 12 large and high-dimensional real-world health care datasets, 6354 training datasets of different complexity were created by varying the subset of variables included in each dataset. Synthetic data were generated using 7 different SDG models. Hallucinations were defined as synthetic records that did not exist in the population, and the hallucination rate (HR) was the proportion of hallucinations in a synthetic dataset. Classification was the downstream prognostic modeling task, conducted via an ML approach (light gradient boosted machine) and an artificial neural network (multilayer perceptron). Mixed-effects models were fitted to examine the relationship between training data complexity and the HR and the HR and the predictive performance of AI and ML models when trained on the synthetic data. RESULTS: The HR ranged from 0.3% to 100% (median 99.1%, IQR 98.5%-100.0%) and increased with training data complexity. However, in most SDG models, the HR did not affect AI and ML prognostic model performance. In the SDG models in which a significant association was detected, the estimated effect was very small, with a maximum decrease in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of -0.0002 (95% CI -0.0003 to -0.0002, P<.001) in light gradient boosting machine and -0.0001 (95% CI -0.0002 to -0.0001, P=.002) in multilayer perceptron. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that while hallucinations may be very common in synthetic tabular health data, they do not necessarily impair its utility for prognostic modeling.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.472
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.130 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207