Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Efficient or Powerful? Trade-offs Between Machine Learning and Deep Learning for Mental Illness Detection on Social Media

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.01082 v1 pith:K5SLLKVT submitted 2025-03-03 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords modelslearningmentalconditionshealthdeepinterpretabilitycapturing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

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.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Tutorial on Using Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models for Mental Illness Detection

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    A tutorial-style benchmark showing that standard classifiers reach binary F1 0.93 to 0.96 and multiclass F1 0.75 to 0.78 on a Kaggle mental-health text dataset, with no new method or result introduced.

Pith tools