When the research subjects fill in the questionnaire,
there are professionals to explain, so that the subjects
can give more credible data with full understanding.
And the diagnostic accuracy of IGDS9-SF reaches
96.1%. Based on Python, the researchers use
algorithms including logistic regression, support
vector machine, decision tree, gradient boosting tree,
adaptive boosting algorithm, and random forest to
judge and predict game addiction behavior.
According to the research results, the prediction
accuracy of these six methods is higher than 90%.
After comprehensively considering the evaluation
indicators such as precision and recall rate, the
adaptive improvement model performs best. The
adaptive improvement model continuously iterates to
enhance the weight ratio of each item and focuses on
the distribution pattern of the data with incorrect
predictions to complete the correction. In this study,
the prediction accuracy reached 99%. However, since
only six schools in three places in Guizhou were
selected in this study, the geographical scope is small,
and its model may need more data training to improve
universality. In addition, the method of obtaining raw
data through questionnaires is more subjective than
that of obtaining data from student behavior and
players, so the data may be biased (Kong, 2024).
3 DISCUSSIONS
Although some machine models in some of the
studies mentioned above have achieved high
accuracy in detecting gaming disorders, each study
may have problems to a greater or lesser extent.
Although the detection accuracy of both in specific
model algorithms has reached a high level, that is,
more than 80%. However, in comparison, the
accuracy of the non-contact model is higher than that
of the contact model. This may be because the EEG
data is more complicated for all Likert scales, and
there are more misjudgements and data losses in the
judgment process. However, the latter needs to design
weights for various indicators, and there is a problem
that a lot of statistical calculation modeling is
required. The problem of non-contact machine model
detection is more serious. For the questionnaire of the
non-contact detection model, since the subjects
themselves conduct self-evaluation in the
questionnaire survey, for example, the scales of
parental family control, self-esteem, and anxiety are
difficult to quantify and there are subjective
misjudgements. Therefore, this will more or less
affect the original data submitted to the model for
processing, thereby affecting the accuracy of the
judgment. In general, both non-contact and contact
models have the problem of lack of universality. Lee
et al.'s EEG model study has few research subjects, so
it lacks universality. Although Song's fuzzy multi-
attribute college student Internet use disorder
prevention and treatment platform gives a relatively
detailed description of the model research and
statistics, according to the author's point of view, the
model is only a proposed concept. If people want to
better apply this model to detect and prevent college
students' game addiction, the support of the school is
required. In addition, some of the data used in the
study, such as Internet usage time and student
attendance, may be misjudged, require various data
associations within the school, and have privacy
issues. More research and investigation are needed
before it can be put into practical use. However, the
game addiction prevention and treatment methods in
this study are more than other studies, and are not the
most commonly used psychological cognitive
therapy for game addiction treatment, which has
certain reference value. For the study by Kong et al.,
they selected students from six high schools in three
regions of Guizhou Province for research. Although
the results are relatively accurate, there will be more
serious regional and age biases. For example, data
from eastern and northern China, as well as college
students, are not covered. However, the results given
by their machine model are only relatively accurate
for the existing research subjects, and the accuracy of
the different models used is more than 90%. In
addition, most of these studies use the game use
disorder evaluation scale as a control to determine
whether the machine is successful. However, as
mentioned above, although the Likert scoring method
in the scale assists in quantifying the scores of various
data, its authenticity still needs to be investigated. But
overall, most of the above machine learning models
perform well. Although there are some problems, the
accuracy of the model itself has been verified in the
study. If there are conditions to conduct more
extensive research in the future, or if there are other
more accurate methods to identify game addicts as
control and training data, then using machine learning
to assist in identifying gaming disorders will greatly
improve the efficiency and accuracy of treatment. If
this technology can overcome the problems of control
data and universality, then its high efficiency and high
accuracy have the potential and prospects for large-
scale use.