MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415125575 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2025.3620205

TrajGPT: Irregular Time-Series Representation Learning of Health Trajectory

2025· article· en· W4415125575 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ziyang Song, Qincheng Lu, He Zhu, David L. Buckeridge, Yue Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTrajectoryInferenceRepresentation (politics)Feature learningDifferential privacyHealth careDiscretizationDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the healthcare domain, time-series data are often irregularly sampled with varying intervals through outpatient visits, posing challenges for existing models designed for equally spaced sequential data. To address this, we propose Trajectory Generative Pre-trained Transformer (TrajGPT) for representation learning on irregularly-sampled healthcare time series. TrajGPT introduces a novel Selective Recurrent Attention (SRA) module that leverages a data-dependent decay to adaptively filter irrelevant past information. As a discretized ordinary differential equation (ODE) framework, TrajGPT captures underlying continuous dynamics and enables a time-specific inference for forecasting arbitrary target timesteps without auto-regressive prediction. Experimental results based on the longitudinal EHR data PopHR from Montreal health system and eICU from PhysioNet showcase TrajGPT's superior zero-shot performance in disease forecasting, drug usage prediction, and sepsis detection. The inferred trajectories of diabetic and cardiac patients reveal meaningful comorbidity conditions, underscoring TrajGPT as a useful tool for forecasting patient health evolution.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207