MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991813872 · doi:10.1111/exsy.12485

Hybrid particle swarm optimization for rule discovery in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease

2019· article· en· W2991813872 on OpenAlexaff
Mariam Zomorodi‐Moghadam, Moloud Abdar, Zohreh Davarzani, Xujuan Zhou, Paweł Pławiak, U. Rajendra Acharya

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceCADCategorical variableSet (abstract data type)Data miningRule-based systemFeature selectionMetaheuristicArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the major causes of mortality worldwide. Knowledge about risk factors that increase the probability of developing CAD can help to understand the disease better and assist in its treatment. Recently, modern computer‐aided approaches have been used for the prediction and diagnosis of diseases. Swarm intelligence algorithms like particle swarm optimization (PSO) have demonstrated great performance in solving different optimization problems. As rule discovery can be modelled as an optimization problem, it can be mapped to an optimization problem and solved by means of an evolutionary algorithm like PSO. An approach for discovering classification rules of CAD is proposed. The work is based on the real‐world CAD data set and aims at the detection of this disease by producing the accurate and effective rules. The proposed algorithm is a hybrid binary‐real PSO, which includes the combination of categorical and numerical encoding of a particle and a different approach for calculating the velocity of particles. The rules were developed from randomly generated particles, which take random values in the range of each attribute in the rule. Two different feature selection methods based on multi‐objective evolutionary search and PSO were applied on the data set, and the most relevant features were selected by the algorithms. The accuracy of two different rule sets were evaluated. The rule set with 11 features obtained more accurate results than the rule set with 13 features. Our results show that the proposed approach has the ability to produce effective rules with highest accuracy for the detection of CAD.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations77
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert SystemsSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207