MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W813322913

Probabilistic Graphical Models for Prognosis and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

2014· dissertation· en· W813322913 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineProbabilistic logicGraphical modelCancerMetastasisHormone therapyClinical trialRadiation therapyOncologyPathologicalInternal medicineGynecologyMachine learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One in nine women is expected to be diagnosed with breast cancer during her life. In 2013, an estimated 23, 800 Canadian women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and 5, 000 will die of it. Making decisions about the treatment for a patient is difficult since it depends on various clinical features, genomic factors, and pathological and cellular classification of a tumor. In this research, we propose a probabilistic graphical model for prognosis and diagnosis of breast cancer that can help medical doctors make better decisions about the best treatment for a patient. Probabilistic graphical models are suitable for making decisions under uncertainty from big data with missing attributes and noisy evidence. Using the proposed model, we may enter the results of different tests (e.g. estrogen and progesterone receptor test and HER2/neu test), microarray data, and clinical traits (e.g. woman's age, general health, menopausal status, stage of cancer, and size of the tumor) to the model and answer to following questions. How likely is it that the cancer will extend in the body (distant metastasis)? What is the chance of survival? How likely is that the cancer comes back (local or regional recurrence)? How promising is a treatment? For example, how likely metastasis is and how likely recurrence is for a new patient, if certain treatment e.g. surgical removal, radiation therapy, hormone therapy, or chemotherapy is applied. We can also classify various types of breast cancers using this model. Previous work mostly relied on clinical data. In our opinion, since cancer is a genetic disease, the integration of the genomic (microarray) and clinical data can improve the accuracy of the model for prognosis and diagnosis. However, increasing the number of variables may lead to poor results due to the curse of dimensionality dilemma and small sample size problem. The microarray data is high dimensional. It consists of around 25, 000 variables per patient. Moreover, structure learning and parameter learning for probabilistic graphical models require a significant amount of computations. The number of possible structures is also super-exponential with respect to the number of variables. For instance, there are more than 10^18 possible structures with just 10 variables. We address these problems by applying manifold learning and dimensionality reduction techniques to improve the accuracy of the model. Extensive experiments using real-world data sets such as METRIC and NKI show the accuracy of the proposed method for classification and predicting certain events, like recurrence and metastasis.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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