MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958091182 · doi:10.18280/rces.050301

Classification of heart disease using multiple classifiers

2019· article· en· W2958091182 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marco Alfonse

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Computer Engineering Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart disease is amongst the most widely recognized diseases in the world.This research aims to consolidate the precision of heart disease classification/diagnosis by developing a system depending on multiple classifiers.The proposed system contains two phases, which are the preprocessing phase and the classification phase.The preprocessing phase includes data cleaning, normalization and accounting for missing values.In the classification phase, multiple classifiers are used as an ensemble technique based on the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), K-Nearest Neighbor (K-NN) and C4.5.A heart disease dataset, which contains four databases and gathered from the UCI machine learning repository, was used for experiments.The proposed classification system gives 99.4% classification precision according to 10-fold cross-validation technique.The outcome obtained from the proposed system shows that its performance is better than that of already reported classification systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Computer Engineering StudiesSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207