aiqbench analysis
This research addresses the critical challenge of forecasting rare suicide attempts using Ecological Momentary Assessment data, demonstrating that Latent Variable Multiple Output Gaussian Processes can effectively pool information across patients without relying on discrete demographic subgroups. The study reveals that patient similarity is continuous and best inferred directly from behavioral data rather than predefined categories, offering a robust method to mitigate overfitting in low-data scenarios for mental health monitoring.
Improving Forecasts of Suicide Attempts for Patients with Little Data
arXiv:2511.18199v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) studies provide real-time data on suicidal thoughts and behaviors, but forecasting suicide attempts remains challenging: attempts are rare, and the pathways patients take to them are heterogeneous. Here, we investigate a cohort of patients from an EMA study with recorded suicide-related events. We show that a single model fit to all patients forecasts poorly, while idiographic (per-patient) models show improvement but overfit for those with little data. Based on this result, one may hypothesize that patients should be partitioned into subgroups---this way, similar patients' data can be pooled together to improve forecasts. However, we show that grouping patients at random already improves forecasts, with performance increasing monotonically with the number of groups. Moreover, we show that grouping patients by demographics yields worse forecasts than random groupings. From these results, we hypothesize that patient similarity is continuous, rather than discrete, and must be inferred from the data. This motivated us to use Latent Variable Multiple Output Gaussian Processes (LVMOGPs), adapted to our data. Preliminary results show that, even without careful kernel design, LVMOGPs already match the strongest baseline models on most metrics, and their latent spaces yield a similarity between patients that we can inspect directly. Because the cohort is conditioned on the outcome and the splits are not temporal, we read these results as evidence that idiographic structure exists and can be recovered, not as deployable forecasting performance---an area for future work.
Abstract:Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) studies provide real-time data on suicidal thoughts and behaviors, but forecasting suicide attempts remains challenging: attempts are rare, and the pathways patients take to them are heterogeneous. Here, we investigate a cohort of patients from an EMA study with recorded suicide-related events. We show that a single model fit to all patients forecasts poorly, while idiographic (per-patient) models show improvement but overfit for those with little data. Based on this result, one may hypothesize that patients should be partitioned into subgroups---this way, similar patients' data can be pooled together to improve forecasts. However, we show that grouping patients at random already improves forecasts, with performance increasing monotonically with the number of groups. Moreover, we show that grouping patients by demographics yields worse forecasts than random groupings. From these results, we hypothesize that patient similarity is continuous, rather than discrete, and must be inferred from the data. This motivated us to use Latent Variable Multiple Output Gaussian Processes (LVMOGPs), adapted to our data. Preliminary results show that, even without careful kernel design, LVMOGPs already match the strongest baseline models on most metrics, and their latent spaces yield a similarity between patients that we can inspect directly. Because the cohort is conditioned on the outcome and the splits are not temporal, we read these results as evidence that idiographic structure exists and can be recovered, not as deployable forecasting performance---an area for future work.
Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2511.18199 [stat.ML]
(or arXiv:2511.18199v2 [stat.ML] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.18199 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 331 words
Related coverage
How to build a cancer vaccine, and whether they will work this time
LessWrong · Jun 8, 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 3, 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026