MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W43770393

Extended fast feature selection for classification modeling

2006· article· en· W43770393 on OpenAlexaff
Weijun Wu, Qigang Gao, Muhong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Conference on Computers · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature selectionComputer scienceData miningFeature (linguistics)Minimum redundancy feature selectionFilter (signal processing)Selection (genetic algorithm)Set (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceQuality (philosophy)Data setProcess (computing)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of a classification algorithm in data mining is greatly affected by the quality of data source. Irrelevant and redundant features of data not only increase the cost of mining process, but also degrade the quality of the result in some cases. This issue is particularly important to high-dimensional data, in that many features may either irrelevant or redundant for a selected classification target. Accordingly, feature selection becomes an essential part in data preparation. The feature selection for classification is to identify and remove irrelevant and redundant features, which do not contribute to modeling for a selected target. Among the existing feature selection methods, fast correlation-based filter and correlation-based feature selection are most commonly used approaches. The main concern of the these methods is that they may over simplify the features of a given data set by removing many useful features because of certain inherent limitation in these methods. As a result, the selected feature set may be over-simplified to be useful in practice. In this paper, we analyze the existing issue, and present an extended fast feature selection algorithm to overcome the problem. Experiments are conducted using real data from financial institutions to demonstrate the improvement in terms of quality of selected features. A result comparison between the proposed method and other three major methods is provided.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Conference on ComputersSame topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207