MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411991166 · doi:10.1016/j.mlwa.2025.100696

Feature engineering through two-level genetic algorithm

2025· article· en· W4411991166 on OpenAlexafffund
Aditi Gulati, Armin Felahatpisheh, Camilo E. Valderrama

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning with Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersMitacs
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)Genetic algorithmComputer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning models are widely used for their high predictive performance, but often lack interpretability. Traditional machine learning methods, such as logistic regression and ensemble models, offer greater interpretability but typically have lower predictive capacity. Feature engineering can enhance the performance of interpretable models by identifying features that optimize classification. However, existing feature engineering methods face limitations: (1) they usually do not apply non-linear transformations to features, ignoring the benefits of non-linear spaces; (2) they usually perform feature selection only once, failing to reduce uncertainty through repeated experiments; and (3) traditional methods like minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) require additional hyperparameters to define the number of selected features. To address these issues, this study proposed a hierarchical two-level feature engineering approach. In the first level, relevant features were identified using multiple bootstrapped training sets. For each training set, the features were expanded using seven non-linear transformation functions, and the minimum feature set maximizing ensemble model performance was selected using the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II). In the second level, candidate feature sets were aggregated using two strategies. We evaluated our approach on twelve datasets from various fields, achieving an average F1 score improvement of 1.5% while reducing the feature set size by 54.5%. Moreover, our approach outperformed or matched traditional filter-based methods. Our approach is available through a Python library ( feature-gen ), enabling others to benefit from this tool. This study highlights the utility of evolutionary algorithms to generate feature sets that enhance the performance of interpretable machine learning models.

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)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachine Learning with ApplicationsSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207