Diagnostic Analysis of Diabetes Mellitus Using Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is caused due to the elevated levels of blood sugar i.e., said to be hyperglycemia. The DM is a metabolic chronic disease; therefore, early diagnosis and treatment is necessary to avoid life-threatening risks. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the diabetes cause high mortality rate with 1.5 million deaths in a year. With the remarkable improvisations in the technology, the disease can be diagnosed earlier. In this paper, we have developed a decision-making support with the machine learning algorithms for DM diagnosis. The Pima Indians Diabetes dataset was chosen to train with Machine Learning algorithms. Our approach begins with Exploratory data analysis, and later the data is sent for data pre-processing and perform the feature Selection techniques. The important features are selected and finally, the data is trained with six various Machine learning (ML) algorithms such as Naïve Bayes, KNN, Random Forest, Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, and eXtreme gradient boosting. The Experimental results of the ML algorithms are calculated by the performance metrics in which that the eXtreme Gradient Boosting has scored highest with 88.2% accuracy than other machine learning algorithms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".