MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414188708 · doi:10.18280/isi.300701

Ensemble Machine Learning for the Classification and Prediction of Mellitus Diabetes

2025· article· en· W4414188708 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eswar Patnala, Jagadeeswara Rao Annam, Shobana Gorintla, V B K L Aruna, Vijaya Bharathi Manjeti, Anil Kumar Pallikonda

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnsemble learningSupport vector machineDiabetes mellitusType 2 Diabetes MellitusFeature (linguistics)Statistical classification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, among the diseases with the greatest rate of growth and diabetes mellitus is the primary cause of illness and transience globally.Diabetes mellitus is the aggregate term for the metabolic disorders are defined by consistently increased blood glucose levels.The most important thing is to identify diabetic patients early on, since this reduces the individuals' chance of developing serious diseases.Early disease detection is made possible in large part by machine learning.This research presents the use of ensemble machine learning for the classification and prophecy of mellitus diabetes.The Pima Indians Diabetes Dataset, which was acquired from the UCI ML Origin, was used in this investigation.This is a proposal for a decision support system that classifies using the AdaBoost algorithm and Decision Stump as a decision tree classifier.768 instances and 8 attributes made up the global dataset used for training by the system.It originated from the Irvine (UCI) ML origin at the University of California.For example, the ensemble AdaBoost and decision tree classifiers scored better with 95% F1-Score, 94% accuracy, 94% precision, and 95% recall.Experimental results essentially demonstrated that the comparison of overall performance outperforms well-known classifiers.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207