Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41512047›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Image generator for tabular data based on non-Euclidean metrics for CNN-based classification.

Yu-Rong Lin, Han-Ming Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Yu-Rong LinDepartment of Statistics, National Chengchi University, Taipei City, Taiwan, Republic of China.
Han-Ming WuDepartment of Statistics, National Chengchi University, Taipei City, Taiwan, Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9464-3127

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tabular data is the predominant format for statistical analysis and machine learning across domains such as finance, biomedicine, and environmental sciences. However, conventional methods often face challenges when dealing with high dimensionality and complex nonlinear relationships. In contrast, deep learning models, particularly Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), are well-suited for automatic feature extraction and achieve high predictive accuracy, but are primarily designed for image-based inputs. This study presents a comparative evaluation of non-Euclidean distance metrics within the Image Generator for Tabular Data (IGTD) framework, which transforms tabular data into image representations for CNN-based classification. While the original IGTD relies on Euclidean distance, we extend the framework to adopt alternative metrics, including one minus correlation, Geodesic distance, Jensen-Shannon distance, Wasserstein distance, and Tropical distance. These metrics are designed to better capture complex, nonlinear relationships among features. Through systematic experiments on both simulated and real-world genomics datasets, we compare the performance of each distance metric in terms of classification accuracy and structural fidelity of the generated images. The results demonstrate that non-Euclidean metrics can significantly improve the effectiveness of CNN-based classification on tabular data. By enabling a more accurate encoding of feature relationships, this approach broadens the applicability of CNNs and offers a flexible, interpretable solution for high-dimensional, structured data across disciplines.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedNeural Networks, ComputerAlgorithmsClassification AlgorithmsConvolutional Neural NetworksDeep LearningHumans

Identifiers

PMID41512047
PMCPMC12788642

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.