MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400033057 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3419215

Ze-HFS: Zentropy-Based Uncertainty Measure for Heterogeneous Feature Selection and Knowledge Discovery

2024· article· en· W4400033057 on OpenAlexaff
Kehua Yuan, Duoqian Miao, Witold Pedrycz, Weiping Ding, Hongyun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceMeasure (data warehouse)Feature selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Feature (linguistics)Knowledge extractionData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge discovery of heterogeneous data is an active topic in knowledge engineering. Feature selection for heterogeneous data is an important part of effective data analysis. Although there have been many attempts to study the feature selection for heterogeneous data, there are still some challenges, such as the unbalanced problem between the stability and validity of the designed model. Hence, this paper focuses on how to design an effective and robust heterogeneous feature selection method, namely a zentropy-based uncertainty measure for heterogeneous feature selection(Ze-HFS). Different from other entropy-based uncertainty measures, the proposed method does not consider single-level information measures but systematically analyzes and integrates the information between different granular levels, which has an obvious advantage in the study of heterogeneous data knowledge discovery. Specifically, a heterogeneous distance metric is first introduced to construct heterogeneous neighborhood granules and heterogeneous neighborhood rough sets(HNRS). Then, the zentropy-based uncertainty measure is developed by analyzing the granular level structure in the HNRS model. Finally, two significant measures based on the above research are designed for heterogeneous feature selection. Compared with other state-of-the-art methods, the experimental results on 18 public datasets demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of the proposed method.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations56
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data EngineeringSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207