Early Prognosis of Diabetes Harnessing Physiological Data and Artificial Intelligence
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an artificial intelligence-based early detection technique for individuals with diabetes. According to the International Diabetes Federation (2024), the number of adults with diabetes is projected to exceed 850 million by 2050. Unhealthy food habits, physical inactivity, and family history are commonly blamed for diabetes. Improperly managed diabetes can lead to life-threatening complications, including cardiovascular diseases, kidney failure, nerve damage, and vision problems. Hence, early detection of diabetes is crucial and has become a primary focus of recent research. Computer-based disease detection, powered by artificial intelligence, can play a pivotal role here. With recent advances in algorithms and artificial intelligence, these technologies have become increasingly popular across diverse fields of biomedicine and bioinformatics, leading to rapid advancements in computer-based disease diagnosis. This work investigates the Pima Indian Diabetes Dataset and demonstrates that a shallow feedforward neural network (FFNN) can predict diabetes from critical biological data, achieving 79.1% accuracy. This population-based projection measure can effectively alert individuals to be vigilant and participate in recommended health screenings.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it