MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113234648 · doi:10.1145/1274000.1274028

Computational intelligence techniques

2007· article· en· W2113234648 on OpenAlexaff
Julio J. Valdés, Alan J. Barton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicHops Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceParticle swarm optimizationSet (abstract data type)Rough setData setData miningArtificial intelligenceGenetic programmingSwarm intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an analysis of microarray gene expression data from patients with and without scleroderma skin disease using computational intelligence and visual data mining techniques. Virtual reality spaces are used for providing unsupervised insight about the information content of the original set of genes describing the objects. These spaces are constructed by hybrid optimization algorithms based on a combination of Differential Evolution (DE) and Particle Swarm Optimization respectively, with deterministic Fletcher-Reeves optimization. A distributed-pipelined data mining algorithm composed of clustering and cross-validated rough sets analysis is applied in order to find subsets of relevant attributes with high classification capabilities. Finally, genetic programming (GP) is applied in order to find explicit analytic expressions for the characteristic functions of the scleroderma and the normal classes. The virtual reality spaces associated with the set of function arguments (genes) are also computed. Several small subsets of genes are discovered which are capable of classifying the data with complete accuracy. They represent genes potentially relevant to the understanding of the scleroderma disease.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHops Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207