Evolving Hybrid Partial Genetic Algorithm Classification Model for Cost-effective Frailty Screening: Investigative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A commonly used method for measuring frailty is the accumulation of deficits expressed as a frailty index (FI). FIs can be readily adapted to many databases, as the parameters to use are not prescribed but rather reflect a subset of extracted features (variables). Unfortunately, the structure of many databases does not permit the direct extraction of a suitable subset, requiring additional effort to determine and verify the value of features for each record and thus significantly increasing cost. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to describe how an artificial intelligence (AI) optimization technique called partial genetic algorithms can be used to refine the subset of features used to calculate an FI and favor features that have the least cost of acquisition. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a residential care database compiled from 10 facilities in Queensland, Australia. The database is comprised of routinely collected administrative data and unstructured patient notes for 592 residents aged 75 years and over. The primary study derived an electronic frailty index (eFI) calculated from 36 suitable features. We then structurally modified a genetic algorithm to find an optimal predictor of the calculated eFI (0.21 threshold) from 2 sets of features. Partial genetic algorithms were used to optimize 4 underlying classification models: logistic regression, decision trees, random forest, and support vector machines. RESULTS: Among the underlying models, logistic regression was found to produce the best models in almost all scenarios and feature set sizes. The best models were built using all the low-cost features and as few as 10 high-cost features, and they performed well enough (sensitivity 89%, specificity 87%) to be considered candidates for a low-cost frailty screening test. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a systematic approach for selecting an optimal set of features with a low cost of acquisition and performance comparable to the eFI for detecting frailty was demonstrated on an aged care database. Partial genetic algorithms have proven useful in offering a trade-off between cost and accuracy to systematically identify frailty.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".