分析模型不确定性在电子健康记录中的作用

Michael W. Dusenberry, Dustin Tran, E. Choi, Jonas Kemp, Jeremy Nixon, Ghassen Jerfel, K. Heller, Andrew M. Dai
{"title":"分析模型不确定性在电子健康记录中的作用","authors":"Michael W. Dusenberry, Dustin Tran, E. Choi, Jonas Kemp, Jeremy Nixon, Ghassen Jerfel, K. Heller, Andrew M. Dai","doi":"10.1145/3368555.3384457","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In medicine, both ethical and monetary costs of incorrect predictions can be significant, and the complexity of the problems often necessitates increasingly complex models. Recent work has shown that changing just the random seed is enough for otherwise well-tuned deep neural networks to vary in their individual predicted probabilities. In light of this, we investigate the role of model uncertainty methods in the medical domain. Using RNN ensembles and various Bayesian RNNs, we show that population-level metrics, such as AUC-PR, AUC-ROC, log-likelihood, and calibration error, do not capture model uncertainty. Meanwhile, the presence of significant variability in patient-specific predictions and optimal decisions motivates the need for capturing model uncertainty. Understanding the uncertainty for individual patients is an area with clear clinical impact, such as determining when a model decision is likely to be brittle. We further show that RNNs with only Bayesian embeddings can be a more efficient way to capture model uncertainty compared to ensembles, and we analyze how model uncertainty is impacted across individual input features and patient subgroups.","PeriodicalId":87342,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"94","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyzing the role of model uncertainty for electronic health records\",\"authors\":\"Michael W. Dusenberry, Dustin Tran, E. Choi, Jonas Kemp, Jeremy Nixon, Ghassen Jerfel, K. Heller, Andrew M. Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3368555.3384457\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In medicine, both ethical and monetary costs of incorrect predictions can be significant, and the complexity of the problems often necessitates increasingly complex models. Recent work has shown that changing just the random seed is enough for otherwise well-tuned deep neural networks to vary in their individual predicted probabilities. In light of this, we investigate the role of model uncertainty methods in the medical domain. Using RNN ensembles and various Bayesian RNNs, we show that population-level metrics, such as AUC-PR, AUC-ROC, log-likelihood, and calibration error, do not capture model uncertainty. Meanwhile, the presence of significant variability in patient-specific predictions and optimal decisions motivates the need for capturing model uncertainty. Understanding the uncertainty for individual patients is an area with clear clinical impact, such as determining when a model decision is likely to be brittle. We further show that RNNs with only Bayesian embeddings can be a more efficient way to capture model uncertainty compared to ensembles, and we analyze how model uncertainty is impacted across individual input features and patient subgroups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"94\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3368555.3384457\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3368555.3384457","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 94

摘要

在医学领域,错误预测的伦理和金钱成本可能是巨大的,而且问题的复杂性往往需要越来越复杂的模型。最近的研究表明,仅仅改变随机种子就足以使原本调谐良好的深度神经网络在各自的预测概率上发生变化。鉴于此,我们研究了模型不确定性方法在医学领域的作用。使用RNN集成和各种贝叶斯RNN,我们表明,总体水平指标,如AUC-PR、AUC-ROC、对数似然和校准误差,不能捕获模型的不确定性。同时,在特定患者的预测和最佳决策显著可变性的存在激发了捕获模型不确定性的需要。了解个体患者的不确定性是一个具有明显临床影响的领域,例如确定模型决策何时可能脆弱。我们进一步表明,与集成相比,仅使用贝叶斯嵌入的rnn可以更有效地捕获模型不确定性,并且我们分析了模型不确定性如何在单个输入特征和患者子组之间受到影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analyzing the role of model uncertainty for electronic health records
In medicine, both ethical and monetary costs of incorrect predictions can be significant, and the complexity of the problems often necessitates increasingly complex models. Recent work has shown that changing just the random seed is enough for otherwise well-tuned deep neural networks to vary in their individual predicted probabilities. In light of this, we investigate the role of model uncertainty methods in the medical domain. Using RNN ensembles and various Bayesian RNNs, we show that population-level metrics, such as AUC-PR, AUC-ROC, log-likelihood, and calibration error, do not capture model uncertainty. Meanwhile, the presence of significant variability in patient-specific predictions and optimal decisions motivates the need for capturing model uncertainty. Understanding the uncertainty for individual patients is an area with clear clinical impact, such as determining when a model decision is likely to be brittle. We further show that RNNs with only Bayesian embeddings can be a more efficient way to capture model uncertainty compared to ensembles, and we analyze how model uncertainty is impacted across individual input features and patient subgroups.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信