Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userReproducibility in Machine Learning for Health
243
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Matthew McDermott
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Authors
Matthew B.A. McDermott
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Machine learning algorithms designed to characterize, monitor, and intervene on human health (ML4H) are expected to perform safely and reliably when operating at scale, potentially outside strict human supervision. This requirement warrants a stricter attention to issues of reproducibility than other fields of machine learning. In this work, we conduct a systematic evaluation of over 100 recently published ML4H research papers along several dimensions related to reproducibility. We find that the field of ML4H compares poorly to more established machine learning fields, particularly concerning data and code accessibility. Finally, drawing from success in other fields of science, we propose recommendations to data providers, academic publishers, and the ML4H research community in order to promote reproducible research moving forward.
rate research
Read More
Users can be supported to adopt healthy behaviors, such as regular physical activity, via relevant and timely suggestions on their mobile devices. Recently, reinforcement learning algorithms have been found to be effective for learning the optimal context under which to provide suggestions. However, these algorithms are not necessarily designed for the constraints posed by mobile health (mHealth) settings, that they be efficient, domain-informed and computationally affordable. We propose an algorithm for providing physical activity suggestions in mHealth settings. Using domain-science, we formulate a contextual bandit algorithm which makes use of a linear mixed effects model. We then introduce a procedure to efficiently perform hyper-parameter updating, using far less computational resources than competing approaches. Not only is our approach computationally efficient, it is also easily implemented with closed form matrix algebraic updates and we show improvements over state of the art approaches both in speed and accuracy of up to 99% and 56% respectively.
In the early 2010s, a crisis of reproducibility rocked the field of psychology. Following a period of reflection, the field has responded with radical reform of its scientific practices. More recently, similar questions about the reproducibility of machine learning research have also come to the fore. In this short paper, we present select ideas from psychologys reformation, translating them into relevance for a machine learning audience.
Synthetic medical data which preserves privacy while maintaining utility can be used as an alternative to real medical data, which has privacy costs and resource constraints associated with it. At present, most models focus on generating cross-sectional health data which is not necessarily representative of real data. In reality, medical data is longitudinal in nature, with a single patient having multiple health events, non-uniformly distributed throughout their lifetime. These events are influenced by patient covariates such as comorbidities, age group, gender etc. as well as external temporal effects (e.g. flu season). While there exist seminal methods to model time series data, it becomes increasingly challenging to extend these methods to medical event time series data. Due to the complexity of the real data, in which each patient visit is an event, we transform the data by using summary statistics to characterize the events for a fixed set of time intervals, to facilitate analysis and interpretability. We then train a generative adversarial network to generate synthetic data. We demonstrate this approach by generating human sleep patterns, from a publicly available dataset. We empirically evaluate the generated data and show close univariate resemblance between synthetic and real data. However, we also demonstrate how stratification by covariates is required to gain a deeper understanding of synthetic data quality.
In mobile health (mHealth), reinforcement learning algorithms that adapt to ones context without learning personalized policies might fail to distinguish between the needs of individuals. Yet the high amount of noise due to the in situ delivery of mHealth interventions can cripple the ability of an algorithm to learn when given access to only a single users data, making personalization challenging. We present IntelligentPooling, which learns personalized policies via an adaptive, principled use of other users data. We show that IntelligentPooling achieves an average of 26% lower regret than state-of-the-art across all generative models. Additionally, we inspect the behavior of this approach in a live clinical trial, demonstrating its ability to learn from even a small group of users.
Machine learning for building energy prediction has exploded in popularity in recent years, yet understanding its limitations and potential for improvement are lacking. The ASHRAE Great Energy Predictor III (GEPIII) Kaggle competition was the largest building energy meter machine learning competition ever held with 4,370 participants who submitted 39,403 predictions. The test data set included two years of hourly electricity, hot water, chilled water, and steam readings from 2,380 meters in 1,448 buildings at 16 locations. This paper analyzes the various sources and types of residual model error from an aggregation of the competitions top 50 solutions. This analysis reveals the limitations for machine learning using the standard model inputs of historical meter, weather, and basic building metadata. The types of error are classified according to the amount of time errors occur in each instance, abrupt versus gradual behavior, the magnitude of error, and whether the error existed on single buildings or several buildings at once from a single location. The results show machine learning models have errors within a range of acceptability on 79.1% of the test data. Lower magnitude model errors occur in 16.1% of the test data. These discrepancies can likely be addressed through additional training data sources or innovations in machine learning. Higher magnitude errors occur in 4.8% of the test data and are unlikely to be accurately predicted regardless of innovation. There is a diversity of error behavior depending on the energy meter type (electricity prediction models have unacceptable error in under 10% of test data, while hot water is over 60%) and building use type (public service less than 14%, while technology/science is just over 46%).
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
