A New Hybrid Feature Selection Method Using T-test and Fitness Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feature selection (FS) (or feature dimensional reduction, or feature optimization) is an essential process in pattern recognition and machine learning because of its enhanced classification speed and accuracy and reduced system complexity. FS reduces the number of features extracted in the feature extraction phase by reducing highly correlated features, retaining features with high information gain, and removing features with no weights in classification. In this work, an FS filter-type statistical method is designed and implemented, utilizing a t-test to decrease the convergence between feature subsets by calculating the quality of performance value (QoPV). The approach utilizes the well-designed fitness function to calculate the strength of recognition value (SoRV). The two values are used to rank all features according to the final weight (FW) calculated for each feature subset using a function that prioritizes feature subsets with high SoRV values. An FW is assigned to each feature subset, and those with FWs less than a predefined threshold are removed from the feature subset domain. Experiments are implemented on three datasets: Ryerson Audio-Visual Database of Emotional Speech and Song, Berlin, and Surrey Audio-Visual Expressed Emotion. The performance of the F-test and F-score FS methods are compared to those of the proposed method. Tests are also conducted on a system before and after deploying the FS methods. Results demonstrate the comparative efficiency of the proposed method. The complexity of the system is calculated based on the time overhead required before and after FS. Results show that the proposed method can reduce system complexity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".