Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39314694›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024

Trade-off between training and testing ratio in machine learning for medical image processing.

Muthuramalingam Sivakumar, Sudhaman Parthasarathy, Thiyagarajan Padmapriya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Developing and validating ultrasound-based machine-learning models incorporating radiomics features to predict malignancy in adnexal masses.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026
    Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Artificial intelligence to investigate metabolomics data for precision medicine.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026
    Review
  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

3 authors.

Muthuramalingam SivakumarDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, TamilNadu, India.
Sudhaman ParthasarathyDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, TamilNadu, India.
Thiyagarajan PadmapriyaDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, TamilNadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) aim to mimic human intelligence and enhance decision making processes across various fields. A key performance determinant in a ML model is the ratio between the training and testing dataset. This research investigates the impact of varying train-test split ratios on machine learning model performance and generalization capabilities using the BraTS 2013 dataset. Logistic regression, random forest, k nearest neighbors, and support vector machines were trained with split ratios ranging from 60:40 to 95:05. Findings reveal significant variations in accuracies across these ratios, emphasizing the critical need to strike a balance to avoid overfitting or underfitting. The study underscores the importance of selecting an optimal train-test split ratio that considers tradeoffs such as model performance metrics, statistical measures, and resource constraints. Ultimately, these insights contribute to a deeper understanding of how ratio selection impacts the effectiveness and reliability of machine learning applications across diverse fields.

Indexed as

Medical image processingOverfittingTrain-test splitUnderfitting

Identifiers

PMID39314694
PMCPMC11419616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.