MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124079586 · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2021.3053181

An Ensemble Hybrid Feature Selection Method for Neuropsychiatric Disorder Classification

2021· article· en· W3124079586 on OpenAlexaff
Liangliang Liu, Shaojie Tang, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Yu‐Ping Wang, Jianxin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceHunan Provincial Science and Technology DepartmentNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Feature selectionArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Computer sciencePhenomicsFeature extractionEnsemble learningBiologyGenomicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic resonance imagings (MRIs) are providing increased access to neuropsychiatric disorders that can be made available for advanced data analysis. However, the single type of data limits the ability of psychiatrists to distinguish the subclasses of this disease. In this paper, we propose an ensemble hybrid features selection method for the neuropsychiatric disorder classification. The method consists of a 3D DenseNet and a XGBoost, which are used to select the image features from structural MRI images and the phenotypic feature from phenotypic records, respectively. The hybrid feature is composed of image features and phenotypic features. The proposed method is validated in the Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics (CNP) dataset, where samples are classified into one of the four classes (healthy controls (HC), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder (BD), and schizophrenia (SD)). Experimental results show that the hybrid feature can improve the performance of classification methods. The best accuracy of binary and multi-class classification can reach 91.22 and 78.62 percent, respectively. We analyze the importance of phenotypic features and image features in different classification tasks. The importance of the structure MRI images is highlighted by incorporating phenotypic features with image features to generate hybrid features. We also visualize the features of three neuropsychiatric disorders and analyze their locations in the brain region.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and BioinformaticsSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207