Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40100653›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence2025

Systematic Bias of Machine Learning Regression Models and Correction.

Hwiyoung Lee, Shuo Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Hwiyoung Lee
Shuo Chen

Funding

A Multivariate Mediation and Deep Learning Framework for Genome-Connectome -Substance Use ResearchDP1DA048968 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI CHEN, SHUO · 2019 to 2023
$2.3M
NIDA NIH HHS DP1 DA048968
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning models for continuous outcomes often yield systematically biased predictions, particularly for values that largely deviate from the mean. Specifically, predictions for large-valued outcomes tend to be negatively biased (underestimating actual values), while those for small-valued outcomes are positively biased (overestimating actual values). We refer to this linear central tendency warped bias as the "systematic bias of machine learning regression". In this paper, we first demonstrate that this systematic prediction bias persists across various machine learning regression models, and then delve into its theoretical underpinnings. To address this issue, we propose a general constrained optimization approach designed to correct this bias and develop computationally efficient implementation algorithms. Simulation results indicate that our correction method effectively eliminates the bias from the predicted outcomes. We apply the proposed approach to the prediction of brain age using neuroimaging data. In comparison to competing machine learning regression models, our method effectively addresses the longstanding issue of "systematic bias of machine learning regression" in neuroimaging-based brain age calculation, yielding unbiased predictions of brain age.

Identifiers

PMID40100653
PMCPMC12139475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.