MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943089774 · doi:10.1109/ccoms.2019.8821633

Performance Improvement of Decision Trees for Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease Using Multi Filtering Approach

2019· article· en· W2943089774 on OpenAlexaff
Moloud Abdar, Elham Nasarian, Xujuan Zhou, Ghazal Bargshady, Vivi Nur Wijayaningrum, Sadiq Hussain

Bibliographic record

Venue2019 IEEE 4th International Conference on Computer and Communication Systems (ICCCS) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsC4.5 algorithmCircumflexDecision treeCardiologyComputer scienceCoronary artery diseaseTree (set theory)Decision tree learningRight coronary arteryInternal medicineMedicineArteryPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsMyocardial infarctionCoronary angiographySupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The heart is one of the strongest muscular organs in the human body. Every year, this disease can kill many people in the world. Coronary artery disease (CAD) is named as the most common type of heart disease. Four well-known decision trees (DTs) are applied on the Z-Alizadeh Sani CAD dataset, which consists of J48, BF tree, REP tree, and NB tree. A multi filtering approach, named MFA, was used to modify the weight of attributes to improve the performance of DTs in this study. The model was applied on three main coronary arteries including the Left Anterior Descending (LAD), Left Circumflex (LCX), and Right Coronary Artery (RCA). The obtained results show that data balancing has a valuable impact on the performance of DTs. The comparison results show that this study provides the best results applied on the Z-Alizadeh Sani dataset compared to previous studies. The proposed MFA could improve the performance of the classic DTs algorithms significantly, with the highest accuracies obtained by NB tree for LAD, LCX, and RCA are 94.92%, 90.97% and 93.43%, respectively.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2019 IEEE 4th International Conference on Computer and Communication Systems (ICCCS)Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207