MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4286626045 · doi:10.1101/2022.07.21.501053

AIFS: A novel perspective, Artificial Intelligence infused wrapper based Feature Selection Algorithm on High Dimensional data analysis

2022· preprint· en· W4286626045 on OpenAlexafffund
Rahi Jain, Wei Xu

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaProstate Cancer Canada
KeywordsFeature selectionComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceData miningCategorical variableLasso (programming language)Selection (genetic algorithm)Set (abstract data type)Machine learningData setPerspective (graphical)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Feature selection is important in high dimensional data analysis. The wrapper approach is one of the ways to perform feature selection, but it is computationally intensive as it builds and evaluates models of multiple subsets of features. The existing wrapper approaches primarily focus on shortening the path to find an optimal feature set. However, these approaches underutilize the capability of feature subset models, which impacts feature selection and its predictive performance. Method and Results This study proposes a novel Artificial Intelligence infused wrapper based Feature Selection (AIFS), a new feature selection method that integrates artificial intelligence with wrapper based feature selection. The approach creates a Performance Prediction Model (PPM) using artificial intelligence (AI) which predicts the performance of any feature set and allows wrapper based methods to predict and evaluate the feature subset model performance without building actual model. The algorithm can make wrapper based method more relevant for high-dimensional data and is flexible to be applicable in any wrapper based method. We evaluate the performance of this algorithm using simulated studies and real research studies. AIFS shows better or at par feature selection and model prediction performance than standard penalized feature selection algorithms like LASSO and sparse partial least squares. Conclusion AIFS approach provides an alternative method to the existing approaches for feature selection. The current study focuses on AIFS application in continuous cross-sectional data. However, it could be applied to other datasets like longitudinal, categorical and time-to-event biological data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGene expression and cancer classification→French-language works237,207→