MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307703018 · doi:10.3390/su142113998

Optimized Stacking Ensemble Learning Model for Breast Cancer Detection and Classification Using Machine Learning

2022· article· en· W4307703018 on OpenAlexaff
Mukesh Kumar, Saurabh Singhal, Shashi Shekhar, Bhisham Sharma, Gautam Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBreast cancerCategorizationComputer scienceBoosting (machine learning)Ensemble learningClassifier (UML)OverfittingGradient boostingHealth careRandom forestMedicineCancerInternal medicineArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is the most frequently encountered medical hazard for women in their forties, affecting one in every eight women. It is the greatest cause of death worldwide, and early detection and diagnosis of the disease are extremely challenging. Breast cancer currently exceeds all other female cancers, including ovarian cancer. Researchers can use access to healthcare records to find previously unknown healthcare trends. According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), breast cancer mortality rates can be lowered if the disease is detected early. The novelty of our work is to develop an optimized stacking ensemble learning (OSEL) model capable of early breast cancer prediction. A dataset from the University of California, Irvine repository was used, and comparisons to modern classifier models were undertaken. The implementation analyses reveal the unique approach’s efficacy and superiority when compared to existing contemporary categorization models (AdaBoostM1, gradient boosting, stochastic gradient boosting, CatBoost, and XGBoost). In every classification task, predictive models may be used to predict the class level, and the current research explores a range of predictive models. It is better to integrate multiple classification algorithms to generate a set of prediction models capable of predicting each class level with 91–99% accuracy. On the breast cancer Wisconsin dataset, the suggested OSEL model attained a maximum accuracy of 99.45%, much higher than any single classifier. Thus, the study helps healthcare professionals find breast cancer and prevent it from happening.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations110
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207