MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Compact NSGA-II for Multi-objective Feature Selection

2023· preprint· en· W4391306046 on OpenAlexaff
Sevil Zanjani Miyandoab, Shahryar Rahnamayan, Azam Asilian Bidgoli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityBrock UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature selectionComputer scienceMetric (unit)Artificial intelligenceSelection (genetic algorithm)Evolutionary algorithmBinary classificationFeature (linguistics)PopulationBinary numberTask (project management)Data miningMachine learningFeature vectorOptimization problemCompact spaceMulti-objective optimizationPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmMathematicsSupport vector machineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature selection is an expensive challenging task in machine learning and data mining aimed at removing irrelevant and redundant features. This contributes to an improvement in classification accuracy, as well as the budget and memory requirements for classification, or any other post-processing task conducted after feature selection. In this regard, we define feature selection as a multi-objective binary optimization task with the objectives of maximizing classification accuracy and minimizing the number of selected features. In order to select optimal features, we have proposed a binary Compact NSGA-II (CNSGA-II) algorithm. Compactness represents the population as a probability distribution to enhance evolutionary algorithms not only to be more memory-efficient but also to reduce the number of fitness evaluations. Instead of holding two populations during the optimization process, our proposed method uses several Probability Vectors (PVs) to generate new individuals. Each PV efficiently explores a region of the search space to find non-dominated solutions instead of generating candidate solutions from a small population as is the common approach in most evolutionary algorithms. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first compact multi-objective algorithm proposed for feature selection. The reported results for expensive optimization cases with a limited budget on five datasets show that the CNSGA-II performs more efficiently than the well-known NSGA-II method in terms of the hypervolume (HV) performance metric requiring less memory. The proposed method and experimental results are explained and analyzed in detail.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207