Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm for Multi-View Feature Selection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-view datasets offer diverse forms of data that can enhance prediction models by providing complementary information. However, the use of multi-view data leads to an increase in high-dimensional data, which poses significant challenges for the prediction models that can lead to poor generalization. Therefore, relevant feature selection from multi-view datasets is important as it not only addresses the poor generalization but also enhances the interpretability of the models. Despite the success of traditional feature selection methods, they have limitations in leveraging intrinsic information across modalities, lacking generalizability, and being tailored to specific classification tasks. We propose a novel genetic algorithm strategy to overcome these limitations of traditional feature selection methods for multi-view data. Our proposed approach, called the multi-view multi-objective feature selection genetic algorithm (MMFS-GA), simultaneously selects the optimal subset of features within a view and between views under a unified framework. The MMFS-GA framework demonstrates superior performance and interpretability for feature selection on multi-view datasets in both binary and multiclass classification tasks. The results of our evaluations on three benchmark datasets, including synthetic and real data, show improvement over the best baseline methods. This work provides a promising solution for multi-view feature selection and opens up new possibilities for further research in multi-view datasets.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it