MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981349659 · doi:10.1108/03684920710747129

Hyperbox classifiers for arrhythmia classification

2007· article· en· W1981349659 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

VenueKybernetes · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicECG Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceCluster analysisFeature (linguistics)Data miningClass (philosophy)Interpretation (philosophy)Fuzzy logicGenetic algorithmMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper sets out to design hyperbox classifiers of high interpretation capabilities. They are based on a collection of hyperboxes – generic and highly interpretable geometric descriptors of data belonging to a certain class. Such hyperboxes directly translate into conditional statements (rules) taking on the well‐known format “if feature 1 assumes values in [ a , b ] and feature 2 assumes values in [ d , f ] and … and feature n assumes values in [ w , z ] then class ω ” where the intervals ([ a , b ],…[ w , z ]) are the respective edges (features) of the corresponding hyperbox. Design/methodology/approach The proposed design process of hyperboxes consists of two main phases. In the first phase, a collection of “seeds” of the hyperboxes is constructed through data clustering being realized by means of the fuzzy C‐means algorithm. During the second phase, the hyperboxes are “grown” (expanded) by applying mechanisms of genetic optimization (and genetic algorithm, in particular). Findings It is demonstrated how the underlying geometry of the hyperboxes supports an immediate interpretation of arrhythmia data by linking the ranges of the features (parameters of the ECG signal) forming the edges of the hyperboxes with the two classes of the signals (normal – abnormal). A collection of comprehensive experiments offers an interesting insight into the geometry of the individual categories of the ECG signals and discusses how the resulting hyperbox classifiers link their geometric properties with the obtained classification rates. Research limitations/implications The structure of the classifier is essential to enhance interpretation capabilities of the architecture and generate a collection of “if‐then” classification rules. Originality/value The study addresses an issue of design of highly interpretable, granular classifiers with the use of the technology of computational intelligence and evolutionary optimization, in particular.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.295 · 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