Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Interpretable Keystroke Biomarkers in Parkinson's Disease
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Interpretable Keystroke Biomarkers in Parkinson's Disease
Abstract:Keystroke dynamics have been explored extensively as a passive digital biomarker for Parkinson's disease (PD), typically by extracting summary statistics from typing timing and training a classifier to discriminate PD from healthy controls. We instead apply inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) to keystroke data, modeling each keystroke as a discrete choice over typing speed and recovering, per subject, an interpretable reward function that explains their observed timing behavior. To our knowledge this is the first application of IRL to keystroke dynamics. On the public neuroQWERTY MIT-CSXPD dataset (85 subjects, 42 with PD), an initial four-parameter reward decomposition (speed, effort, smoothness, hand-alternation cost) was found to suffer severe feature collinearity between two terms ($r=1.000$ in typical contexts); we diagnose and correct this, yielding an identifiable three-parameter model. The recovered speed-preference weight correlates with UPDRS-III severity at $r=-0.607$ ($p<0.001$, $n=42$), replicates independently across two sub-cohorts, is stable across nine sensitivity configurations, and retains a statistically significant contribution beyond raw typing speed alone (incremental $R^2$ from 0.194 to 0.338, $p=0.006$). Two other recovered weights (consistency, hand-alternation) did not survive confound checks and are reported as negative results. We document two implementation bugs found during adversarial code review (session-boundary contamination, a rolling-window data leakage) and show the headline result is materially unchanged after fixing both. We discuss this result in the context of a literature where reported accuracies vary widely between studies (pooled AUC 0.85, I^2=94% in a 2022 meta-analysis), and argue that the validation process itself, not only the correlation coefficient, is part of the contribution.
| Comments: | 7 pages, 1 figure |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2606.25270 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2606.25270v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.25270
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
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.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Can AI Draw Science? A Benchmark for Evaluating Scientific Figure Generation by Text-to-Image and Multimodal Models
Jun 30
-
On the Necessity of a Liquid Substrate for Mesh Intelligence
Jun 30
-
Position: RL Researchers Need to Distinguish Between Solving Simulators and Using Simulators as a Proxy
Jun 30
-
Learning to Distributedly Estimate under Partially Known Dynamics: A Covariance-Agnostic Neural Kalman Consensus Filter
Jun 30
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.