Efficient diagnosis of diabetes mellitus using an improved ensemble method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes is a growing health concern in developing countries, causing considerable mortality rates. While machine learning (ML) approaches have been widely used to improve early detection and treatment, several studies have shown low classification accuracies due to overfitting, underfitting, and data noise. This research employs parallel and sequential ensemble ML approaches paired with feature selection techniques to boost classification accuracy. The Pima India Diabetes Data from the UCI ML Repository served as the dataset. Data preprocessing included cleaning the dataset by replacing missing values with column means and selecting highly correlated features using forward and backward selection methods. The dataset was split into two parts: training (70%), and testing (30%). Python was used for classification in Jupyter Notebook, and there were two design phases. The first phase utilized J48, Classification and Regression Tree (CART), and Decision Stump (DS) to create a random forest model. The second phase employed the same algorithms alongside sequential ensemble methods-XG Boost, AdaBoostM1, and Gradient Boosting-using an average voting algorithm for binary classification. Evaluation revealed that XG Boost, AdaBoostM1, and Gradient Boosting achieved classification accuracies of 100%, with performance metrics including F1 score, MCC, Precision, Recall, AUC-ROC, and AUC-PR all equal to 1.00, indicating reliable predictions of diabetes presence. Researchers and practitioners can leverage the predictive model developed in this work to make quick predictions of diabetes mellitus, which could save many lives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".