IP Library Granted Patent US 12,603,182
Granted Patent B2
US 12,603,182 · App. 17/360,254 · Granted Apr 14, 2026

Interpretation of machine learning classifications in clinical diagnostics using shapley values and uses thereof

Inventors: Heinrich Röder (Steamboat Springs, CO); Joanna Röder (Steamboat Springs, CO); Laura Maguire (Boulder, CO); Robert W. Georgantas, III (Broomfield, CO); Thomas Campbell (Thronton, CO); Lelia Net (Boulder, CO)
Assignee: Biodesix, Inc.
G16H50/30G06N20/00G16H10/60G16H15/00G16H40/20G16H50/20
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,603,182
App. No.
17/360,254
Granted
Apr 14, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Shapley values (SVs) have become an important tool to further the goal of explainability of machine learning (ML) models. However, the computational load of exact SV calculations increases exponentially with the number of attributes. Hence, the calculation of SVs for models incorporating large numbers of interpretable attributes is problematic. Molecular diagnostic tests typically seek to leverage information from hundreds or thousands of attributes, often using training sets with fewer instances. Methods are described for evaluate SVs using Monte Carlo sampling or exact calculation in polynomial time (i.e., reasonably quickly and efficiently) using the architecture of a ML model designed for robust molecular test generation, and without requiring classifier retraining.

Claims (23)

1 . A method executing within a programmed computer to predict a patient outcome with a trained machine learning classifier, comprising the steps of:

(a) training the trained machine learning classifier arranged as a logistical combination of atomic classifiers with drop-out regularization, wherein the drop-out regularization comprises randomly selecting a small fraction of the atomic classifiers as a result of carrying out a dropout from the set of atomic classifiers;

(b) storing a set of values for attributes associated with a patient to the programmed computer to access an electronic health record of the patient or from one or more measurements obtained from the patient or sample obtained therefrom, or both;

(c) executing the trained machine learning model to classify the set of values with the trained machine learning classifier and generate the prediction using the programmed computer to classify the set of values with the trained machine learning classifier;

(d) calculating a relative contribution of some or all of the attributes to the prediction to generate an explanation of the prediction using the programmed computer; wherein calculating the relative contribution comprises either calculating exactly or estimating Shapley values for the attributes and wherein calculating the relative contribution comprises selecting subsets of the attributes to calculate the Shapley values by drawing a number of attributes associated with the patient for a subset and then randomly picking the attributes used within the subset, for dropout iterations; and

(e) displaying a report using the programmed computer, wherein the report comprises (1) the prediction of risk of future adverse event for the patient while hospitalized, (2) data representing the calculation of the relative contribution of some or all of the attributes from step (d), either in text or graphical format, and wherein the report is for planning or adjusting a treatment for the patient.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein step (b) comprises performing a physical measurement on the sample obtained from the patient, and wherein the report comprises one or more of a first comment on the prediction and a second comment on the data.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein step (b) comprises performing a physical measurement comprising mass spectrometry.

4 . The method of claim 2 , wherein the physical measurement comprises a genomic or proteomic assay.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the patient comprises a hospitalized patient and wherein the attributes comprise clinical and demographic data and findings obtained at admission to a hospital and wherein the prediction comprises a prediction of risk of future adverse event for the patient while hospitalized.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the trained machine learning classifier comprises a hierarchical arrangement of a binary classifier and one or more child classifiers, wherein the method further comprises the step of calculating the Shapley values for one or more of the attributes for predictions generated by both the binary classifier and the one or more child classifiers, and wherein the atomic classifiers of the trained machine learning classifier are k-nearest neighbor classifiers.

7 . The method of claim 1 ,

wherein the Shapley values for the one or more of the attributes are calculated by a Monte Carlo sampling method, and

wherein step (e) comprises presenting the Shapley values using one or more radar plots around a comment corresponding to the prediction and one or more of the Shapley values.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the Shapley values for the one or more of the attributes are calculated as averages for multiple drop-out iterations.

9 . The method of claim 6 , wherein calculating the relative contribution of step (d) is performed in accordance with one of:

using subset sampling using least squares,

evaluating pairwise differences of the Shapley values, and

decomposing the Shapley values for drop-out iterations.

10 . The method of claim 5 , further comprising the step of using the report generated in step (e) to plan or adjust a treatment for the patient.

11 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising the step of using the report generated in step (e) to plan or adjust a treatment for the patient.

12 . The method of claim 8 , wherein calculating the relative contribution is performed by calculating one of the Shapley values as an average for multiple drop-out iterations.

13 . The method of claim 7 , wherein the Shapley values are calculated as a solution of a linear system.

Assignments (3)
SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Nov 22, 2022
From: BIODESIX, INC.
To: PERCEPTIVE CREDIT HOLDINGS IV, LP
Reel/Frame 061977/0919 →
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE APPLICATION NUMBER FROM 17366254 TO 17360254 PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ON REEL 057343 FRAME 0388. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE ASSIGNMENT. Recorded Sep 7, 2021
From: RODER, HEINRICH; RODER, JOANNA; MAGUIRE, LAURA; GEORGANTAS, ROBERT W., III; CAMPBELL, THOMAS; NET, LELIA
To: BIODESIX, INC.
Reel/Frame 057651/0097 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 31, 2021
From: RODER, HEINRICH; RODER, JOANNA; MAGUIRE, LAURA; GEORGANTAS, ROBERT W., III; CAMPBELL, THOMAS; NET, LELIA
To: BIODESIX, INC.
Reel/Frame 057343/0388 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63125527 · Dec 15, 2020
Related Publication 20220188701A1 · Jun 16, 2022
References Cited (47)
US 7572596B2 · Bowser · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 7736905B2 · Roder et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 8433669B2 · Amini et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 10007766B2 · Röder et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10037874B2 · Röder et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10594529B1 · Delmarco · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10950348B2 · Röder et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11476003B2 · Campbell et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11710564B1 · Maier · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11894147B2 · Campbell et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 11977991B1 · Mugan · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20100293207A1 · Parthasarathy et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110295622A1 · Farooq et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120197896A1 · Li et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130288244A1 · Deciu · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130338933A1 · Deciu · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140093873A1 · Tynan · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20150050308A1 · Hook · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150102216A1 · Roder et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20200211716A1 · Lefkofsky · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200400668A1 · Eden et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210118538A1 · Oliveira et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210147448A1 · Kanai · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220059242A1 · Schneider et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220189638A1 · Campbell et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230005621A1 · Campbell et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230290452A1 · Kast et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
Adam J. Singer, MD et al., “Point-of-care testing reduces length of stay in emergency department chest pain patients”, Jun. 2005 vol. 45 No. 6 (Year: 2005). [cited by examiner]
H Robert Bergen III, et al., “identification of Transthyretin variations by sequential proteomic and Genomic Analysis”, 2004 (Year: 2004). [cited by examiner]
Robert Bergen et al ; “Identification of Transthyretin Variants by Sequential Proteomic and Genomic Analysis”; Clinical Chemistry 1544-1552 (2004) (Year: 2004). [cited by examiner]
Adam Singer et al ; “Point-of-Care Testing Reduces Length of Stay in Emergency Department Chest Pain Patients” ; Copyright ª 2005 by the American College of Emergency Physicians. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.11.020 (… [cited by examiner]
Random Forest “Radom Forest”, Oct. 2025, p. 12, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_forest. [cited by examiner]
Aas et al., “Explaining Individual Predictions When Features Are Dependent: More Accurate Approximations to Shapley Values”, 26 pages, Mar. 25, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Asceierto et al., “Proteomic test for anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade treatment of metastatic melanoma with and without BRAF mutations”, Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer, vol. 7, No. 91, 8 pages, (2019). [cited by applicant]
Jia et al, “Towards Efficient Data Valuation Based on the Shapley Value”, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AIS-TATS) PMLR, vol. 89, 10 pages, (2019). [cited by applicant]
Kasimir-Bauer et al, “Definition and Independent Validation of a Proteomic-Classifier in Ovarian Cancer”, Cancers, vol. 12, No. 2519, 17 pages, Sep. 4, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Lundberg et al., “A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions”, 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2017), 10 pages, (2017). [cited by applicant]
Merrick et al, “The Explanation Game: Explaining Machine Learning Models Using Shapley Values”, 20 pages, Aug. 18, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Molnar, “Interpretable Machine Learning, A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable”, Chapter 5.9, Nov. 20, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Ribeiro et al, “‘Why Should I Trust You?’ Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier”, Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 1135-1144, Aug. 13, 2016. [cited by applicant]
Röder et al., “A drop out-regularized classifier development approach optimized for precision medicine test discovery from omics data”, BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 20, No. 325, 14 pages, Jun. 13, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Röder et al., “Robust identification of molecular phenotypes using semi-supervised learning”, BMC Informatics, vol. 20, No. 273, 25 pages, May 28, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Shapley, “A value for n-person games”, The Shapley Value, Chapter 2, pp. 31-40, (1988). [cited by applicant]
Štrumbelj et al., “An Efficient Explanation of Individual Classifications of Game Theory”, Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 11, pp. 1-18, (2010). [cited by applicant]
Štrumbelj et al., “Explaining prediction models and individual predictions with feature contributions”, Knowledge and Information Systems, vol. 41, pp. 647-665, Aug. 30, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Williamson et al., “Efficient nonparametric statistical inference on population feature importance using Shapley values”, Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning PMLR, vol. 119, (2020). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in PCT/US2021/063560 dated Jan. 19, 2022 (10 pages). [cited by applicant]