Machine learning identifies FOUR autism subtypes

Post Reply New Topic

I hope somebody gets to see the whole paper and lets us know what the subtypes are. It's a shame (in that respect) that I no longer work for the university. It had a good library and I'd likely have been able to get a copy of the paper for free that way. Hopefully, sooner or later somebody's going to spill the beans and put a list up on the Web of these 4 types in plain English, if those types turn out to be real. As they suggest, it could be a big leap forward.

^ This article explains the 4 subtypes https://news.weill.cornell.edu/news/202 ... rain-study

I'm still a little confused, to be honest.
But my take on that article is that these are the four subtypes:

1. High verbal intelligence, severe social communication deficits, less repetitive behaviours. Associated with hyperactive visual processing, with oxytocin as a hub protein.

2. High verbal intelligence, more repetitive behaviours, less social communication deficits. Associated with weak visual information processing.

3. Severe social impairments and repetitive behaviours, with good verbal abilities.

4. Severe social impairments and repetitive behaviours, with poor verbal abilities.

That's the kind of clear, straightforward list I wish the article had directly given. I'd be ashamed of myself if I wrote an article mentioning 4 things without itemising them clearly. I hope the consensus is that your list is correct. It looks like quite a bit of work to parse them out of the article.

I'm not quite sure if verbal intelligence means the same as verbal abilities.
If it's the same, then the 4 subtypes are across 3 domains, something like this:

1. verbal ability good - social communication poor - repetitive behaviours less poor
2. verbal ability good - social communication less poor - repetitive behaviours poor
3. verbal ability less poor - social communication poor - repetitive behaviours poor
4. verbal ability poor - social communication poor - repetitive behaviours poor

But it's really not clear if that's what they mean.
Guess I might have to actually buy the paper.

I don't know if I fit any of those.

I'd say I'm low in all of them.

At best? Verbal Average, Social Horrible, Repetitive Horrible


Boring Test Scores:

Verbal Intelligence means everything related to expressive or receptive language.
That includes speaking and listening, reading, writing, sign language, etc.

My score is quite low because I'm mute and don't speak or communicate well verbally.
I also have an audio-visual LD (listening or watching for information like on videos.)

I only learn by reading and I best communicate by writing (not speaking.)


Maybe I'm Category 3? I sound like a hurricane and I like it.

I cannot deduce my own case with those categories.

I'm already excluded from anything related to good verbal abilities...

So that leaves two -- high repetitive behaviors but poor social skills, or just poor social skills.
I do not fit with either. Unless repetitive behaviors are not, well, behaviors.

Unless 'good verbal abilities' actually meant 'passable to the norm' standards and not like 'above average and possibly gifted' range standards.
When one doesn't have a language comprehension and expression of a 'school grader at best' -- basically verbally 'passing'.

Just as 'HFA' meant 'good masker'.

I don't know about this. I don't think Chat Gpt could diagnose autism.

I think I am in group 2 because I don't always repeat myself.

Thanks for that, I'm still a bit confused but it is better

Thanks Mrs Peel, that's what I got from the article too.

I reckon I'm group 1 and my daughter is group 2. She has lots of repetitive behaviours but gets on well with people. I have very few repetitive behaviours but really struggle socially.

Yes! I'd be ashamed too.

It's ironic. They should be clearer because we are autistic and need clarity.

I am brilliant with language and can express myself well verbally IF I HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO PREPARE. When people talk to me they think I'm very good at communicating.

However, it is all talk because I like playing around with words, I often fail to grasp the impact of what I'm saying.

I also only learn by reading (not those YouTube videos where you have to listen closely. I do not listen well. I have subtitles on TV 24/7)

I communicate very well in writing, then when people meet me and I don't say much there is a big mismatch so they get a shock- the eloquent person they thought they were meeting is tongue-tied in reality.

I would say I'm category 1.

Or you could read it here

I suppose they know that if they just listed the 4 subtypes, we'd have no reason to buy the original. I doubt they have our interests at heart. I hate it when health information is monetised. When I worked at a university, all we had to do was to send a request card to any author to get a free copy of their paper. They weren't legally bound to comply, but it was considered bad form not to, and they usually did.

Wow! Good work. Hope they don't send the black helicopters after you for doing that.
Which page of that itemises the 4 subtypes? They've got to be in there somewhere. Though scientists aren't always good at presenting simple, at-a-glance information for general consumption.