比较机器学习与深度学习在社交媒体心理健康检测中的表现与权衡
Efficient or Powerful? Trade-offs Between Machine Learning and Deep Learning for Mental Illness Detection on Social Media
- 对比逻辑回归、随机森林等机器学习与ALBERT、GRU等深度学习模型
- 中等规模数据下两者分类性能相近,但机器学习更易解释
- 适合关注可解释性或计算资源有限的研究者使用
社交媒体平台通过用户生成内容为心理健康趋势分析提供了宝贵视角,涵盖抑郁、焦虑和自杀意念等话题。本文评估了包括逻辑回归、随机森林、LightGBM在内的多种机器学习模型,以及ALBERT和门控循环单元(GRUs)等深度学习架构,在二分类与多分类任务中对心理健康状况的识别效果。结果表明,在中等规模数据集上,机器学习与深度学习模型表现相当,其中机器学习模型可通过特征重要性得分提供更强的可解释性,而深度学习模型对复杂语言模式更具鲁棒性。机器学习需人工特征工程,深度学习则直接从文本中学习层次化表示。逻辑回归能捕捉特征与心理状态间的正负关联,树基模型则通过分叉选择突出决策能力。本研究为不同数据规模、可解释性需求与计算约束下的模型选择提供了实证依据。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Social media platforms provide valuable insights into mental health trends by capturing user-generated discussions on conditions such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models have been increasingly applied to classify mental health conditions from textual data, but selecting the most effective model involves trade-offs in accuracy, interpretability, and computational efficiency. This study evaluates multiple ML models, including logistic regression, random forest, and LightGBM, alongside deep learning architectures such as ALBERT and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs), for both binary and multi-class classification of mental health conditions. Our findings indicate that ML and DL models achieve comparable classification performance on medium-sized datasets, with ML models offering greater interpretability through variable importance scores, while DL models are more robust to complex linguistic patterns. Additionally, ML models require explicit feature engineering, whereas DL models learn hierarchical representations directly from text. Logistic regression provides the advantage of capturing both positive and negative associations between features and mental health conditions, whereas tree-based models prioritize decision-making power through split-based feature selection. This study offers empirical insights into the advantages and limitations of different modeling approaches and provides recommendations for selecting appropriate methods based on dataset size, interpretability needs, and computational constraints.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。