Learning Feature Engineering for Classification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feature engineering is the task of improving predictive modelling performance on a dataset by transforming its feature space. Existing approaches to automate this process rely on either transformed feature space exploration through evaluation-guided search, or explicit expansion of datasets with all transformed features followed by feature selection. Such approaches incur high computational costs in runtime and/or memory. We present a novel technique, called Learning Feature Engineering (LFE), for automating feature engineering in classification tasks. LFE is based on learning the effectiveness of applying a transformation (e.g., arithmetic or aggregate operators) on numerical features, from past feature engineering experiences. Given a new dataset, LFE recommends a set of useful transformations to be applied on features without relying on model evaluation or explicit feature expansion and selection. Using a collection of datasets, we train a set of neural networks, which aim at predicting the transformation that impacts classification performance positively. Our empirical results show that LFE outperforms other feature engineering approaches for an overwhelming majority (89%) of the datasets from various sources while incurring a substantially lower computational cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it