MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132896244

A Machine Learning Framework to Predict IQ Decline Post-treatment in Pediatric Brain Cancer with Consideration of Computational Efficiency

2023· dissertation· W7132896244 on OpenAlexafffund
Feiyu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyUniversity of TorontoNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPipeline (software)Artificial neural networkDeep learningEnsemble learningPrecision and recallGridScheme (mathematics)Hyperparameter optimization
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing models for predicting intelligence quotient (IQ) for pediatric brain cancer patients after intensity-modulated radiation therapy (RT) are derived from statistical linear and nonlinear analysis. While those models are computationally efficient, they use oversimplified representations of a patient's overall brain features. They neglect other important and complex brain structure information, such as image segmentations of healthy tissue and the target to be treated.\\ Therefore, we develop a machine learning (ML) approach to predict post-RT IQ based on 57 pediatric cases. Our data-model pipeline allows us to train over 600 billion parameters. Such high-density processing pipeline requires a novel parallel computing framework for the training and tuning tasks. Our framework can tractably handle these computational requirements by utilizing 1) an extensive grid search fitting-training scheme on individual and ensemble ML models, 2) automated network morphism that optimizes neural network structure efficiently, and 3) hardware configurations for RAM, CPU and GPU environments. This framework is adaptable to most of the ML-RT applications and particularly useful in both high- and low-dimensional datasets shown in many clinical applications. In predicting high or low post-RT IQ deficit, our framework outperforms baseline models, achieving a test accuracy of 75\%, a mean training accuracy of 83.3\% (±13), recall $\geq75\%$, and precision-recall harmonic mean of 0.75 for pre-Treatment-Planning dataset. We also demonstrate that complex models like ensemble stack model and deep neural nets can be practical under certain conditions.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→