Paper detail

Stacked Penalized Logistic Regression for Selecting Views in Multi-View Learning

In biomedical research, many different types of patient data can be collected, such as various types of omics data and medical imaging modalities. Applying multi-view learning to these different sources of information can increase the accuracy of medical classification models compared with single-view procedures. However, collecting biomedical data can be expensive and/or burdening for patients, so that it is important to reduce the amount of required data collection. It is therefore necessary to develop multi-view learning methods which can accurately identify those views that are most important for prediction. In recent years, several biomedical studies have used an approach known as multi-view stacking (MVS), where a model is trained on each view separately and the resulting predictions are combined through stacking. In these studies, MVS has been shown to increase classification accuracy. However, the MVS framework can also be used for selecting a subset of important views. To study the view selection potential of MVS, we develop a special case called stacked penalized logistic regression (StaPLR). Compared with existing view-selection methods, StaPLR can make use of faster optimization algorithms and is easily parallelized. We show that nonnegativity constraints on the parameters of the function which combines the views play an important role in preventing unimportant views from entering the model. We investigate the performance of StaPLR through simulations, and consider two real data examples. We compare the performance of StaPLR with an existing view selection method called the group lasso and observe that, in terms of view selection, StaPLR is often more conservative and has a consistently lower false positive rate.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.