63 lines
4.0 KiB
TeX
63 lines
4.0 KiB
TeX
%! Author = alex
|
|
%! Date = 3/6/25
|
|
|
|
|
|
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
|
|
|
|
In this study, we investigated the performance of different machine learning architectures on the task of fertility prediction,
|
|
with the aim to find a model that performs well for natural family planning and natural contraception on regular and irregular cycles.
|
|
|
|
Our goal was to
|
|
|
|
Based on an extensive real-world database and established model architectures for timeseries analysis,
|
|
we expect to outperform both rule-based baselines and related studies.
|
|
We think, that for regular cycles, the performance difference will be lower than
|
|
|
|
|
|
% talk about whether bbt / temperature can be used for such a task, discuss bbt doubt papers
|
|
% While previous work has argued against the predictive value of BBT~\cite{some_author_2010}, our findings suggest otherwise.
|
|
%Using continuous core body temperature data from 40,000 cycles, we demonstrate that temperature-based models can reliably detect ovulatory patterns, even in the presence of physiological noise or mild irregularity.
|
|
% explain the need for further medical interpretation of the results of either model
|
|
|
|
|
|
The findings do not show a clear indication, that the temperature can be used as a predictive target.
|
|
The results of irregular cycles should be significantly better to infer, that there are usable patters in the
|
|
temperature readings before the ovulation or the fertile days.
|
|
|
|
For a practical use case of any model's prediction, a medical interpretation should be performed.
|
|
While the results themselves can give a clear indication of both the fertility probability and whether the ovulation
|
|
of a given cycle is already over for any given day, there a variety of external factors that should be taken into
|
|
consideration for a direct output to the user.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
\section{Future Work}\label{sec:future_work}
|
|
There are several directions in which this study could be extended,
|
|
most of which were omitted due to time and resource constraints but represent valuable areas for future exploration.
|
|
|
|
One major area is feature selection.
|
|
The dataset used includes additional user-entered markers such as physiological signs (e.g., bleeding, illness, stress)
|
|
and external events (e.g., intercourse, pregnancy tests).
|
|
These markers were not included in the present analysis but may carry predictive value and could meaningfully improve model performance.
|
|
Similarly, the introduction of engineered or intermediate features—derived from raw inputs—may help models better
|
|
capture relevant patterns and temporal dependencies.
|
|
|
|
Alternative target formulations could also be explored to better reflect the structure of the fertile window and ovulation.
|
|
For example, instead of predicting a daily fertility probability, models could aim to identify the absolute day of ovulation,
|
|
or estimate the time until the next (or since the last) ovulation event.
|
|
|
|
As noted in Section~\ref{subsubsec:data_labeling}, ovulation labels were assigned using a
|
|
retrospective algorithm trained on expert-annotated data.
|
|
Any inaccuracies in this algorithm propagate directly to the supervised learning labels.
|
|
Thus, improving prediction quality may require a newly labeled dataset—ideally combining expert review with algorithmic assistance.
|
|
|
|
Finally, while the models used in this study (LSTMs and Transformers) are well-established for time-series analysis,
|
|
they were not extensively customized.
|
|
Future work could involve tailoring architectures more specifically to the characteristics of menstrual cycle data.
|
|
Recent transformer variants designed for time series, such as \emph{TimeXer}~\cite{wang_timexer_2024} or \emph{MAMBA}~\cite{wang_is_2024},
|
|
may offer improved performance.
|
|
Alternatively, a custom architecture could be developed to better reflect the domain-specific structure of biological temperature data.
|
|
|
|
Future work may incorporate more advanced hyperparameter optimization techniques,
|
|
such as Bayesian Optimization, Genetic Algorithms, or Neural Architecture Search (NAS),
|
|
to better explore the joint parameter space in a more efficient and principled manner. |