mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SGC-RML: A reliable and interpretable longitudinal assessment for PD in real-world DNS

arXiv 2605.08302 ↗First posted 8 May 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Real-world digital Parkinson's disease assessment faces challenges such as heterogeneous modalities, cross-device bias, and incomplete labeling. Existing methods often focus on average predictive performance, lacking the reliability mechanisms needed for retrospective reliability-aware assessment - namely, determining when the model is reliable, when to reject an assessment, when to retest, and from which symptom dimensions the predictions are based. This paper proposes SGC-RML, which maps speech, gait, wearable motion, mobility tasks, and clinical variables to a shared 8-dimensional symptom node space (7 clinical symptom nodes and 1 reliability_state auxiliary node), unifying motor and non-motor representations through a symptom atlas. By jointly introducing uncertainty estimation, conformal calibration, and selective decision routing, the model can not only predict symptoms and severity but also reject assessments or suggest retests when evidence is insufficient. We validate this framework on five real-world PD datasets, covering classification, regression, event detection, and longitudinal severity prediction. Experiments show that SGC-RML achieves an MAE of 4.579 / R^2 of 0.772 on PPMI, an AUC of 0.953 on mPower, and an AUC of 0.825 on PADS. Under leak-free temporal anchoring, as few as 5 subject-specific anchors transform UCI from an essentially non-predictive subject-independent setting (motor MAE 8.38, CCC 0.02) into a calibrated longitudinal assessment (motor MAE 3.24, CCC 0.756) with split-conformal coverage held at the 0.80 target. Under the Daphnet LOSO protocol, it achieves an F1 of 0.803 / AUC of 0.872. These results demonstrate that SGC-RML provides a unified paradigm for accurate, calibrated, auditable, and symptom-interpretable retrospective longitudinal assessment of PD under incomplete multimodal conditions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.

Builds on

22 of 50 references.

References · 22

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,854
  3. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  4. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  5. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  6. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  7. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
  8. 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,362
  9. 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,335
  10. 2022A Time Series is Worth 64 Words: Long-term Forecasting with Transformerscited by 1,981
  11. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
  12. 2017Multimodal Machine Learning: A Survey and Taxonomycited by 1,004
10 more
  1. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
  2. 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 799
  3. 2021Revisiting Deep Learning Models for Tabular Datacited by 725
  4. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
  5. 2019Conformalized Quantile Regressioncited by 620
  6. 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 511
  7. 2022Transformers in Time Series: A Surveycited by 489
  8. 2021TS2Vec: Towards Universal Representation of Time Seriescited by 463
  9. 2019SelectiveNet: A Deep Neural Network with an Integrated Reject Optioncited by 333
  10. 2024Deep Multimodal Learning with Missing Modality: A Surveycited by 89

Built on by

Not cited yet.