Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for Early Heart Disease Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart disease remains among the leading causes of death worldwide, and its early detection ability can be the difference between life and death. In this research, we investigate the capability of machine learning—namely Support Vector Machines (SVM)—to predict the occurrence of heart disease based on regular clinical information. We used the Cleveland Heart Disease dataset, which contains critical patient data like age, gender, blood pressure, cholesterol level, type of chest pain, and other crucial health factors. Prior to creating our model, we pre-processed and cleaned the data by dealing with missing values, changing categorical variables into numerical form, and scaling the features for uniformity. We then optimized the SVM model using grid search and cross-validation to make it run at its optimal level. The resulting model had an accuracy of 86.41% in the test set and performed better than other popular models such as logistic regression and random forest. The significant about this work is the potential for applying it in practical situations. An SVM-based program such as this could be a second opinion for physicians or integrated into early diagnostic tools—most helpful in clinics with limited access to specialists. It's progress toward smarter, data-driven healthcare that enables faster and more precise diagnoses. There's still potential for expansion, using bigger, more varied datasets or incorporating real-time patient information could further enhance the model. But this research demonstrates that with the proper data and methodology, machine learning can be a useful tool in the early diagnosis of heart disease.
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 | 0.017 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".