A High Accuracy Integrated Bagging-Fuzzy-GBDT Prediction Algorithm for Heart Disease Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Associated with high morbidity and mortality, heart disease has become a severe threat to peoples health throughout the world. The recent development of Internet of Things (IoT) and machine learning in e-healthcare have contributed to the monitoring, prediction and diagnosis of heart disease. Particularly, the heart disease prediction can effectively facilitate disease prevention, diagnosis and timely treatment. However, traditional prediction models are weak in accuracy and generalization. In this paper, we propose a high accuracy integrated prediction algorithm for heart disease diagnosis. The fuzzy logic and Bootstrap Aggregating (Bagging) algorithm based on Gradient Boosting Decision Tree (GBDT) algorithm are combined to process heart disease data and generate multiple weak classifiers. At first, we integrate the fuzzy logic with GBDT to reduce the complexity of data. Moreover, we develop the Fuzzy-GBDT model integrated Bagging algorithm to avoid the interference of sensitive points and achieve partial parallelism. The simulation results show the proposed Fuzzy-Bagging-GBDT algorithm improves the accuracy and recall of heart disease prediction compared with GBDT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".