MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999676174 · doi:10.1198/jasa.2011.ap10446

Bias-Corrected Hierarchical Bayesian Classification With a Selected Subset of High-Dimensional Features

2011· article· en· W1999676174 on OpenAlexaffabout
Longhai Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloComputer scienceHyperparameterFeature selectionBayesian probabilityArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Bayesian hierarchical modelingMachine learningBayesian inferenceModel selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Posterior probabilityData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Class prediction based on high-dimensional features has received a great deal of attention in many areas of application. For example, biologists are interested in using microarray gene expression profiles for diagnosis or prognosis of a certain disease (e.g., cancer). For computational and other reasons, it is necessary to select a subset of features before fitting a statistical model, by evaluating how strongly the features are related to the response. However, such a feature selection procedure will result in overconfident predictive probabilities for future cases, because the signal-to-noise ratio in the retained features is exacerbated by the feature selection. In this article we develop a hierarchical Bayesian classification method that can correct for this feature selection bias. Our method, which we term bias-corrected Bayesian classification with selected features (BCBCSF), uses the partial information from the feature selection procedure, in addition to the retained features, to form a correct (unbiased) posterior distribution of certain hyperparameters in the hierarchical Bayesian model that control the signal-to-noise ratio of the dataset. We take a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) approach to inferring the model parameters. We then use MCMC samples to make predictions for future cases. Because of the simplicity of the models, the inferred parameters from MCMC are easy to interpret, and the computation is very fast. Simulation studies and tests with two real microarray datasets related to complex human diseases show that our BCBCSF method provides better predictions than two widely used high-dimensional classification methods, prediction analysis for microarrays and diagonal linear discriminant analysis. The R package BCBCSF for the method described here is available from http://math.usask.ca/longhai/software/BCBCSF and CRAN. KEY WORDS: Feature selectionHigh-dimensional classificationOptimistic bias Acknowledgments This work was supported by fundings from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Canadian Foundation for Innovation. The author also thanks JASA editors and two anonymous referees for their great help in improving the previous drafts.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
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 score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Statistical AssociationSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207