MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886413047 · doi:10.1109/icit.2017.43

An Enhanced Chaos-Based Firefly Model for Parkinson's Disease Diagnosis and Classification

2017· article· en· W2886413047 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruppa K. Thulasiram, Parimala Thulasiraman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsSupport vector machineArtificial intelligenceFeature selectionComputer scienceMachine learningKernel (algebra)Feature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Firefly algorithmData miningSelection (genetic algorithm)MathematicsParticle swarm optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many researchers are currently attracted to develop predictive models like telediagnosis and telemonitoring by analyzing speech pattern for diagnosing Parkinson's disease (PD). For this purpose, a novel predictive model is proposed in this study by combining an enhanced chaos-based firefly algorithm (ECFA) and support vector machine (SVM) learning with RBF kernel, termed as ECFA-SVM, for Parkinson's disease diagnosis. The ECFA model will identify relevant combination of features that will help SVM in building an effective predictive model for PD dataset. In this study, selecting genetic algorithm (GA) enhances the functional characteristic of CFA by generating diversified initial candidate fireflies of the population which is then used by the CFA to update the position of candidates for the next iteration, thereby produces optimal subset of features based on SVM. The effectiveness of the model is then assessed on a set of performance metrics such as size of the feature subset, classification accuracy, sensitivity, precision, specificity, ROC area, and F-measure applying on PD dataset obtained from UCI repository. The efficiency of the model is established comparing against GA-SVM and CFA-SVM models on the same PD dataset. The comparison of the performance of the models was studied from four important perspectives such as the number of features, classification accuracy, area under ROC curve and error matrix to make sure its superiority of feature selection and classification over the counterparts.

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)0.000
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 score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207