Machine Learning , some thoughts

Anastasiou A. a.anastasiou at swansea.ac.uk
Mon Jun 25 06:44:06 EDT 2018


Dear Bert and all

> I wonder, Is OpenEhr usable for recognizing pattern in diseases over 
> Machine Learning, isn't behind every diagnosis a small cloud of 
> archetypes which forms a pattern? The features of recognizing/learning 
> should not be found in archetypes ID's, although, that can help a lot, 
> but it should also look to datatypes, their semantics and relations.

openEHR and the dual modelling approach, model the data which reflect the 
evolution of a person's health condition.

Inferences from the data (irrespectively of whether they are stored in an openEHR enabled 
server or not) would return information about the health condition itself.

Inferences from the data models (descriptions of the data) would return information 
about the modeller's understanding of the health condition and anything else that stems from 
the requirements for cataloguing it.

As a similar example, consider what else does ICD-10 encodes along with the rest of the "...Classification of Disease":
https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/V00-Y99/V30-V39

We usually express research questions in sets of codes, sometimes with branches to make sure that we pin point 
exactly the information about the condition and not anything else that might be encoded along.


> Isn't OpenEhr better for recognizing pattern then whichever classic 
> storage structure, because the data-structures in OpenEhr are in 
> semantic models, this instead of some weird Codd-structure, which only 
> has technical reasons to exist.

Yes and no. It is more a question of whether the EHR does encode all information that is dependent on the class.


> 1) We don't need CKM anymore, computers can understand archetypes, we 
> don't need to restrict ourselves to a limited number. We can also use 
> archetypes we do not know, and maybe we never know. Even, we wouldn't 
> need archetypes anymore, just as reminder/instruction. But the 
> computer could create the archetypes on the fly, when seeing the kind 
> of data, the relations, the diagnosis.

The last bit where the "computer" composes the archetype is indeed incredibly interesting and in the current climate 
it could be something like "AI Assisted Archetype Composition"......I doubt we can go 100% automated there.

Do words encode everything in a language exactly?

Logic expressions / deductions are "stale". Given the axioms and the operations, you can work out the complete universe. 

This is partially true for **some** of the stuff that we do but for others, there comes a point where the "Concept Set" gets 
re-distributed or enriched. New things, new ideas, new conceptions are coming in. The "computer" needs a way to encode 
this process in order to express it and this will happen as soon as "we" understand how that happens too :)


> 2) We could use the pattern to recognize healthcare situations, and 
> maybe treat/handle/cure on base of instructions coming from machine 
> learning.

The time scales for doing this would be enormous. We can probably work out a lower limit by looking at the lifecycle of archetypes 
in the current CKM.

BTW, I am not shooting down the proposals / ideas, there is definitely fertile ground for the use of openEHR along the lines you suggest here.


All the best
Athanasios Anastasiou







>
> Have a nice day.
>
> Bert
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.opene
> hr.org
>


_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org



More information about the openEHR-clinical mailing list