Predicting Symptoms of Amotivation and Anhedonia among University Students with a Novel Oversampling Method
Authors: Dang Nguyen, Bao Duong, Arun Kumar, Dat Phan-Trong, Julian Berk, Taylor Braund, Kien Do, Debopriyo Bal, Wu Yi Zheng, Leonard Hoon, Jill Newby, Helen Christensen, Svetha Venkatesh, Alexis Whitton, Sunil Gupta
Organizations: Applied Artificial Intelligence Initiative (A2I2), Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia · Black Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
University students experience disproportionately high rates of common mental health conditions, such as depression, which can impair learning, social functioning, and overall well-being. Within this context, symptoms of amotivation (i.e. loss of motivational drive) and anhedonia (i.e. diminished interest or pleasure) are particularly debilitating, yet they frequently go undetected. Developing new approaches to identify students with prominent amotivation and anhedonia could enable earlier and more targeted intervention. Machine learning (ML) methods have increasingly been used to classify individuals according to symptom severity. However, these ML models often suffer from class imbalance, where the majority of cases fall in the low-symptom group and relatively few in the high-symptom group. This imbalance can reduce model accuracy and bias predictions. To address this, studies commonly employ the popular oversampling strategy SMOTE. However, SMOTE has a notable limitation: it may generate invalid values for nominal variables. In this paper, we introduce a novel and effective oversampling method that addresses this shortcoming. Our approach leverages a predictive model to generate nominal variables, rather than interpolating them. We validate our method on a large-scale GPS location dataset collected from university students and demonstrate that it is significantly better than existing oversampling approaches in predicting elevated symptoms of amotivation and anhedonia.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Training and evaluation phases of an oversampling method. Training: the oversampling method learns from the imbalanced dataset Dtrain to generate synthetic minority samples D^minor to construct the rebalanced dataset D^train . Evaluation: D^train is used to train ML classifiers, and the classifiers are evaluated on a held-out test set Dtest to compute performance metrics (e.g. AUC-scores). A better score implies a better oversampling method .
Figure 2: Our SMOTE-PRED has three steps. First, we apply SMOTE to the imbalanced dataset Dtrain to generate synthetic minority samples D^minor . As SMOTE treats all variables as continuous variables, it generates continuous values for the nominal variable Treatment_ID . Second, from Dtrain , we extract continuous and nominal variables, and use them as features and labels respectively to train a predictive model. Finally, we extract continuous variables from D^minor , and use them as input features for our trained predictive model to predict values for the nominal variable Treatment_ID . We then replace generated continuous values in Treatment_ID by SMOTE with our predicted integers (i.e nominal values).
Table 1: Some fake examples of our GPS location dataset for an illustrative purpose. Table (a) shows two students along with their visited locations. Each student has a unique ID and multiple GPS locations (in terms of latitude and longitude). Each of them is associated with a timestamp. “Horizontal Accuracy” and“Vertical Accuracy” variables measure the accuracy range (in meters) of the recorded locations. Table (b) shows the amotivation scores of these two students. Each score s is in a range of [0,9] , where s<5 is “ no or minimal symptoms of amotivation ” whereas s≥5 is a “ high symptoms of amotivation ”.
Figure 3: Distributions of amotivation scores (a) and labels (b). Among 482 students, 80% of them are “low amotivation” (i.e. majority class) and 20% are “high amotivation” (i.e. minority class).
Student
Date
nlocation
disttravel
abcxyz12
15/11/2021
2
4.01
16/11/2021
1
0
12abc456
19/11/2021
1
0
Table 2: Our fake examples in Table 1 (a) are represented with two features “the number of visited locations” nlocation and “the average distance traveled” disttravel .
Figure 4: For an illustrative purpose, we show fake mobility patterns of a student with “low amotivation” (a) and a student with “high amotivation” (b). The x-axis shows the date while the y-axis shows the number of visited locations in one day.
Figure 5: Distributions of variables nlocation and disttravel in each trial. The y-axis shows the mean value and its standard error.
Student
nlocation
disttravel
trial_id
day1
…
day15
day1
…
day15
abcxyz12
3.0
…
3.3
2.8
…
1.3
1
12abc456
2.0
…
3.0
8.0
…
4.3
3
Table 3: The final tabular format of our GPS location dataset has 30 continuous variables and one nominal variable trial_id .
Table 4: Hyper-parameters of ML classifiers to predict student amotivation.
AUC-score
Imbalance
AdaSyn
SMOTE
SMOTE-NC
CTGAN
TVAE
SMOTE-PRED
kNN
0.5221
0.6065
0.6346
0.6498
0.5382
0.5436
0.6735
(0.011)
(0.035)
(0.022)
(0.028)
(0.015)
(0.013)
(0.025)
SVM
0.4949
0.5854
0.5817
0.5572
0.4806
0.5963
0.6198
(0.003)
(0.025)
(0.015)
(0.019)
(0.009)
(0.019)
(0.024)
DT
0.5310
0.5372
0.4992
0.5237
0.5167
0.5012
0.5491
(0.019)
(0.014)
(0.024)
(0.027)
(0.013)
(0.016)
(0.023)
Table 5: AUC ± (std) of each oversampling method combined with five popular ML classifiers. Bold and underline indicate the best and second-best methods.
Figure 6: AUC-scores of our method SMOTE-PRED and other SMOTE variants.
Figure 7: AUC-score vs. the number of imputed days.
Imputation method
AUC
linear
0.6735 (0.0246)
nearest
0.5976 (0.0259)
nearest-up
0.5938 (0.0254)
zero
0.5929 (0.0215)
s-linear
0.6735 (0.0246)
previous
0.5929 (0.0215)
Table 6: AUC-score vs. imputation methods.
Features
AUC
{ nlocation , disttravel , trial_id }
0.6735 (0.0246)
– nlocation
0.5836 (0.0203)
– disttravel
0.4697 (0.0275)
– trial_id
0.6360 (0.0155)
Table 7: AUC-score vs. features. “– nlocation ” means that we remove all 15 features related to nlocation (see Table 3 ).
Figure 8: Feature importance. A higher score indicates a more important feature.
University students experience disproportionately high rates of common mental health conditions, such as depression, which can impair learning, social functioning, and overall well-being. Although lifestyle interventions such as mindfulness and physical activity can reduce the symptoms, many do not achieve symptomatic remission. Developing new approaches to identify students with poor outcomes could enable earlier and more targeted intervention. Machine learning (ML) methods have increasingly been used to predict remission in depressive patients. However, these ML models often suffer from class imbalance, where there may be an unequal proportion of people in the remitted group relative to the non-remitted group. This imbalance can reduce model accuracy and bias predictions. To address this, studies commonly employ the popular oversampling strategy SMOTE. However, SMOTE has a notable limitation: it may generate invalid synthetic minority samples. In a clinical context, these false positives can lead to incorrect risk stratification, potentially delaying necessary escalated care for patients unlikely to remit. In this paper, we introduce a novel and effective oversampling method that addresses this shortcoming. Our approach leverages the variance function of a Gaussian process to estimate the uncertainty of generated minority samples to reduce false positives. We validate our method on a depression dataset collected from university students and demonstrate that it is better than existing oversampling approaches in predicting remission (i.e., treatment outcome). By improving the reliable identification of non-responders, our method provides a robust computational tool to help clinicians rapidly pivot to adjunctive therapies, thereby personalizing and optimizing mental health care pathways.
Dang Nguyen, Arun Kumar A, Taylor A. Braund +8
Applied Artificial Intelligence Initiative (A2I2), Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia · Black Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Missing values are routinely treated as defects to be eliminated through deletion or imputation prior to machine learning. In many applied domains, however, missingness itself carries information, reflecting experimental constraints, measurement choices, or systematic mechanisms tied to the data-generating process. Eliminating or masking this structure can distort class boundaries, introduce bias, and reduce generalisability; particularly in imbalanced datasets where minority classes are already under-represented. OverNaN is a lightweight, NaN-aware oversampling framework designed to address class imbalance without erasing missingness structure. It extends common synthetic oversampling methods to operate directly on incomplete feature vectors, allowing missing values to be preserved, propagated, or selectively interpolated according to explicitly defined strategies. Rather than repairing missing data, OverNaN treats missingness as part of the feature space over which synthetic samples are generated. This paper situates OverNaN within the broader landscape of imbalanced learning, missing-data handling, and NaN-tolerant algorithms. Using representative examples included with the software, we demonstrate that meaningful missingness can be retained during oversampling without introducing artificial certainty. OverNaN is intended for practitioners working with small, incomplete, and imbalanced datasets in scientific and engineering domains where missingness is unavoidable and often informative.
Amanda S Barnard
School of Computing Australian National University Acton, ACT 2601
The prevailing IR-threshold paradigm posits a positive correlation between imbalance ratio (IR) and oversampling effectiveness, yet this assumption remains empirically unsubstantiated through controlled experimentation. We conducted 12 controlled experiments (N > 100 dataset variants) that systematically manipulated IR while holding data characteristics (class separability, cluster structure) constant via algorithmic generation of Gaussian mixture datasets. Two additional validation experiments examined ceiling effects and metric-dependence. All methods were evaluated on 17 real-world datasets from OpenML. Upon controlling for confounding variables, IR exhibited a weak to moderate negative correlation with oversampling benefits. Class separability emerged as a substantially stronger moderator, accounting for significantly more variance in method effectiveness than IR alone. We propose a 'Context Matters' framework that integrates IR, class separability, and cluster structure to provide evidence-based selection criteria for practitioners.
Yuwen Jiang, Songyun Ye
School of Artificial Intelligence, Guangzhou Institute of Science and Technology, Guangzhou, China