MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W169484840 · doi:10.20381/ruor-19633

Feature selection with a general hybrid algorithm

2004· dissertation· en· W169484840 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2004
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature selectionClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceAlgorithmWeightingFeature (linguistics)Machine learningHeuristicFilter (signal processing)Statistical classificationSelection (genetic algorithm)Pattern recognition (psychology)Data mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Feature Selection problem involves discovering a subset of features, such that a classifier built only with this subset would have better predictive accuracy than a classifier built from the entire set of features. A large number of algorithms have already been proposed for the feature selection problem. Although significantly different with regards to (1) the search strategy they use to determine the right subset of features and (2) how each subset is evaluated, feature selection algorithms are usually classified in three general groups: Filters, Wrappers and Hybrid solutions. In this thesis, we propose a new hybrid system for the problem of feature selection in machine learning. The idea behind this new algorithm, FortalFS, is to extract and combine the best characteristics of filters and wrappers in one algorithm. FortalFS uses results from another feature selection system as a starting point in the search through subsets of features that are evaluated by a machine learning algorithm. With an efficient search heuristic, we can decrease the number of subsets of features to be evaluated by the learning algorithm, consequently decreasing computational effort and still be able to select an accurate subset. We have also designed a variant of the original algorithm in the attempt to work with feature weighting algorithm. In order to evaluate this new algorithm, a number of experiments were run and the results compared to well-known feature selection filter and wrapper algorithms, such as Focus, Relief, LVF, and others. Such experiments were run aver a number of datasets from the UCI Repository. Results showed that FortalFS outperforms most of the algorithms significantly. However, it presents time-consuming performance similar to that of wrappers. Additional experiments using specially designed artificial datasets demonstrated that FortalFS is able to identify and remove both irrelevant, redundant and randomly class-correlated features. The FortalFS time-consumption issue is addressed through parallelism. A parallel version of FortalFS based on the master/slave design pattern is implemented and evaluated. In several experiments, we were able to achieve near optimal speedups.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it