Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36092038›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

A comparison of distributed machine learning methods for the support of "many labs" collaborations in computational modeling of decision making.

Lili Zhang, Himanshu Vashisht, Andrey Totev, Nam Trinh, Tomas Ward

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 91% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lili ZhangSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Himanshu VashishtIn the Wild Research Limited, Dublin, Ireland.
Andrey TotevSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Nam TrinhSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Tomas WardSchool of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Dublin City University · IEScience Foundation Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning models are powerful tools for representing the complex learning processes and decision-making strategies used by humans. Such neural network models make fewer assumptions about the underlying mechanisms thus providing experimental flexibility in terms of applicability. However, this comes at the cost of involving a larger number of parameters requiring significantly more data for effective learning. This presents practical challenges given that most cognitive experiments involve relatively small numbers of subjects. Laboratory collaborations are a natural way to increase overall dataset size. However, data sharing barriers between laboratories as necessitated by data protection regulations encourage the search for alternative methods to enable collaborative data science. Distributed learning, especially federated learning (FL), which supports the preservation of data privacy, is a promising method for addressing this issue. To verify the reliability and feasibility of applying FL to train neural networks models used in the characterization of decision making, we conducted experiments on a real-world, many-labs data pool including experiment data-sets from ten independent studies. The performance of single models trained on single laboratory data-sets was poor. This unsurprising finding supports the need for laboratory collaboration to train more reliable models. To that end we evaluated four collaborative approaches. The first approach represents conventional centralized learning (CL-based) and is the optimal approach but requires complete sharing of data which we wish to avoid. The results however establish a benchmark for the other three approaches, federated learning (FL-based), incremental learning (IL-based), and cyclic incremental learning (CIL-based). We evaluate these approaches in terms of prediction accuracy and capacity to characterize human decision-making strategies. The FL-based model achieves performance most comparable to that of the CL-based model. This indicates that FL has value in scaling data science methods to data collected in computational modeling contexts when data sharing is not convenient, practical or permissible.

Indexed as

data privacydecision-makingdeep learningdistributed learningfederated learning

Identifiers

PMID36092038
PMCPMC9453750
OpenAlexW4293091700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.