MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411077753 · doi:10.3390/info16060476

Benchmarking Variants of Recursive Feature Elimination: Insights from Predictive Tasks in Education and Healthcare

2025· article· en· W4411077753 on OpenAlex
Okan Bulut, Bin Tan, Elisabetta Mazzullo, Ali Syed

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

VenueInformation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingFeature (linguistics)Health careComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningComputational biologyBusinessPolitical scienceBiologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Originally developed as an effective feature selection method in healthcare predictive analytics, Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) has gained increasing popularity in Educational Data Mining (EDM) due to its ability to handle high-dimensional data and support interpretable modeling. Over time, various RFE variants have emerged, each introducing methodological enhancements. To help researchers better understand and apply RFE more effectively, this study organizes existing variants into four methodological categories: (1) integration with different machine learning models, (2) combinations of multiple feature importance metrics, (3) modifications to the original RFE process, and (4) hybridization with other feature selection or dimensionality reduction techniques. Rather than conducting a systematic review, we present a narrative synthesis supported by illustrative studies from EDM to demonstrate how different variants have been applied in practice. We also conduct an empirical evaluation of five representative RFE variants across two domains: a regression task using a large-scale educational dataset and a classification task using a clinical dataset on chronic heart failure. Our evaluation benchmarks predictive accuracy, feature selection stability, and runtime efficiency. Results show that the evaluation metrics vary significantly across RFE variants. For example, while RFE wrapped with tree-based models such as Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) yields strong predictive performance, these methods tend to retain large feature sets and incur high computational costs. In contrast, a variant known as Enhanced RFE achieves substantial feature reduction with only marginal accuracy loss, offering a favorable balance between efficiency and performance. These findings underscore the trade-offs among accuracy, interpretability, and computational cost across RFE variants, providing practical guidance for selecting the most appropriate algorithm based on domain-specific needs and constraints.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.251 · 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