It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Cervical cancer is the fourth most prevalent cancer in women which has claimed 3,41,831 lives and accounted for 6,04,127 new cases in 2020 worldwide. To reduce such a vast mortality rate, early detection of the disease is essential. A fast, accurate, and interpretable machine learning model is a research subject. Fewer features reduce the computational effort and improve interpretation. A 3-Stage Hybrid feature selection approach and a Stacked Classification model are evaluated on the cervical cancer dataset obtained from the UCI Machine Learning Repository with 35 features and one outcome variable. Stage-1 uses a Genetic Algorithm and Logistic Regression Architecture for Feature Selection and selects twelve features well correlated with the class but not among themselves. Stage-2 utilizes the same Genetic Algorithm and Logistic Regression Architecture for Feature Selection to select five features. In Stage-3, Logistic Regression (LR), Naïve Bayes (NB), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Extra Trees (ET), Random Forest (RF), and Gradient Boosting (GDB) are used with the five features to identify patients with or without cancer. Data splitting, several metrics, and statistical tests are used, along with 10-fold cross validation, to do a comparative analysis. LR, NB, SVM, ET, RF, and GDB demonstrate improvement across performance measures by reducing the number of features to five. In the 66-34 split, all five machine learning methods except NB recorded 97% accuracy with 5 features. Also, the Stacked model produced higher than 96% accuracy with five features in 66-34 and 80-20 splits, and in 10-fold cross validation. Various performance aggregators have shown improved results with reduced features when compared to previous studies. Finally, with approximately 100% performance in classification results, the suggested ensemble model showed its promise. The output results were compared to those of other studies on the same dataset, and the proposed classifiers were found to be the most effective across all performance dimensions.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer