MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316928465 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0280258

Stable variable ranking and selection in regularized logistic regression for severely imbalanced big binary data

2023· article· en· W4316928465 on OpenAlexafffund
Khurram Nadeem, Mehdi-Abderrahman Jabri

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Resources CanadaCanada First Research Excellence FundUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsLasso (programming language)CovariateFeature selectionRegularization (linguistics)Logistic regressionRanking (information retrieval)Computer scienceRegressionStatisticsArtificial intelligenceElastic net regularizationMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop a novel covariate ranking and selection algorithm for regularized ordinary logistic regression (OLR) models in the presence of severe class-imbalance in high dimensional datasets with correlated signal and noise covariates. Class-imbalance is resolved using response-based subsampling which we also employ to achieve stability in variable selection by creating an ensemble of regularized OLR models fitted to subsampled (and balanced) datasets. The regularization methods considered in our study include Lasso, adaptive Lasso (adaLasso) and ridge regression. Our methodology is versatile in the sense that it works effectively for regularization techniques involving both hard- (e.g. Lasso) and soft-shrinkage (e.g. ridge) of the regression coefficients. We assess selection performance by conducting a detailed simulation experiment involving varying moderate-to-severe class-imbalance ratios and highly correlated continuous and discrete signal and noise covariates. Simulation results show that our algorithm is robust against severe class-imbalance under the presence of highly correlated covariates, and consistently achieves stable and accurate variable selection with very low false discovery rate. We illustrate our methodology using a case study involving a severely imbalanced high-dimensional wildland fire occurrence dataset comprising 13 million instances. The case study and simulation results demonstrate that our framework provides a robust approach to variable selection in severely imbalanced big binary 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.384
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.004 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207