Back

Using a self-attention architecture to automate valence categorization of French teenagers' free descriptions of their family relationships. A proof of concept.

Sedki, M.; Vidal, N.; Roux, P.; Barry, C.; Speranza, M.; Falissard, B.; Brunet-Gouet, E.

2023-01-18 health informatics
10.1101/2023.01.16.23284557 medRxiv
Show abstract

This paper proposes a proof of concept of using natural language processing techniques to categorize valence of family relationships described in free texts written by french teenagers. The proposed study traces the evolution of techniques for word embedding. After decomposing the different texts in our possession into short texts composed of sentences and manual labeling, we tested different word embedding scenarios to train a multi-label classification model where a text can take several labels : labels describing the family link between the teenager and the person mentioned in the text and labels describing the teenagers relationship with them positive/negative/neutral valence). The natural baseline for word vector representation of our texts is to build a TF-IDF and train classical classifiers (Elasticnet logistic regression, gradient boosting, random forest, support vector classifier) after selecting a model by cross validation in each class of machine learning models. We then studied the strengths of word-vectors embeddings by an advanced language representation technique via the CamemBERT transformer model, and, again, used them with classical classifiers to compare their respective performances. The last scenario consisted in augmenting the CamemBERT with output dense layers (perceptron) representing a classifier adapted to the multi-label classification and fine-tuning the CamemBERT original layers. The optimal fine-tuning depth that achieves a bias-variance trade-off was obtained by a cross-validation procedure. The results of the comparison of the three scenarios on a test dataset show a clear improvement of the classification performances of the scenario with fine-tuning beyond the baseline and of a simple vectorization using CamemBERT without fine-tuning. Despite the moderate size of the dataset and the input texts, fine-tuning to an optimal depth remains the best solution to build a classifier.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
21.6%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 11%
6.6%
3
Expert Systems with Applications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
4
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.1%
5
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.8%
6
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.3%
7
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
37 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.2%
9
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
10
Sensors
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.4%
11
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
12
Frontiers in Digital Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.4%
13
BMC Bioinformatics
457 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
14
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.1%
15
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
16
Bioinformatics Advances
203 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
17
Life
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
18
Frontiers in Psychiatry
87 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
19
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
47 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
20
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
21
International Journal of Medical Informatics
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
22
Scientific Data
209 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
23
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
24
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
25
Brain Sciences
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
26
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
27
Mathematics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
28
Computational Biology and Chemistry
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%