Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31799516›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the ... International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications. International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications2018

Recursive Feature Elimination by Sensitivity Testing.

Nicholas Sean Escanilla, Lisa Hellerstein, Ross Kleiman, Zhaobin Kuang, James D Shull, David Page

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications. International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial intelligence to investigate metabolomics data for precision medicine.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nicholas Sean EscanillaDepartment of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
Lisa HellersteinTandon School of Engineering, New York University, Brooklyn, New York.
Ross KleimanDepartment of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
Zhaobin KuangDepartment of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
James D ShullDepartment of Oncology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
David PageDepartment of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Christian Capitini · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Research Training for Computation and Informatics in Biology and MedicineT15LM007359 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Mark W. Craven, Colin Noel Dewey · 2002 to 2026
$22.6M
TrainingU54AI117924 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CRAVEN, MARK W. · 2014 to 2018
$11.3M
GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY TO ESTROGEN INDUCED MAMMARY CAR01CA077876 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SHULL, JAMES D · 1998 to 2012
$4.4M
Characterization of Emca4, the Rat Ortholog of the 8q24 Breast Cancer Risk LocusR01CA204320 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SHULL, JAMES D · 2017 to 2021
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS R01 CA077876NCI NIH HHS R01 CA204320NIAID NIH HHS U54 AI117924NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007359
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is great interest in methods to improve human insight into trained non-linear models. Leading approaches include producing a ranking of the most relevant features, a non-trivial task for non-linear models. We show theoretically and empirically the benefit of a novel version of recursive feature elimination (RFE) as often used with SVMs; the key idea is a simple twist on the kinds of sensitivity testing employed in computational learning theory with membership queries (e.g., [1]). With membership queries, one can check whether changing the value of a feature in an example changes the label. In the real-world, we usually cannot get answers to such queries, so our approach instead makes these queries to a trained (imperfect) non-linear model. Because SVMs are widely used in bioinformatics, our empirical results use a real-world cancer genomics problem; because ground truth is not known for this task, we discuss the

Identifiers

PMID31799516
PMCPMC6887481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.