MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394862804 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3388526

Feature Selection With Discernibility and Independence Criteria

2024· article· en· W4394862804 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Independence (probability theory)Artificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Data miningPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature selection plays a significant role in data mining and machine learning. It is challenging to determine how many features are necessary to form an optimal feature subset. To address this challenge, an innovative visual 2D feature selection framework is introduced, in which the feature discernibility and independence are defined to evaluate its capability for classification and its relevance to other features, respectively. All features are represented in 2D space with discernibility as <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$x$</tex-math></inline-formula> -axis and independence as <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$y$</tex-math></inline-formula> -axis. The features located in the upper right corner represent high discernibility and high independence, so comprise the optimal feature subset. This leads to the formation of a family of feature selection algorithms. Three such algorithms are proposed in this paper referred to as FSDIE, FSDIR, and FSDIS (Feature Selection based on the Discernibility and the Independence, respectively, of Exponent, Reciprocal, and anti-Similarity). To speed-up these three algorithms, a clustering based feature preselection first eliminates some unrelated and redundant features. Extensive experiments on UCI datasets, face datasets and gene expression datasets demonstrate that these three 2D feature selection algorithms are superior to the state-of-the-art methods indicating the power of our 2D feature selection framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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