The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gene selection with guided regularized random forest
Open accessAbstract
The regularized random forest (RRF) was recently proposed for feature selection by building only one ensemble. In RRF the features are evaluated on a part of the training data at each tree node. We derive an upper bound for the number of distinct Gini information gain values in a node, and show that many features can share the same information gain at a node with a small number of instances and a large number of features. Therefore, in a node with a small number of instances, RRF is likely to select a feature not strongly relevant. Here an enhanced RRF, referred to as the guided RRF (GRRF), is proposed. In GRRF, the importance scores from an ordinary random forest (RF) are used to guide the feature selection process in RRF. Experiments on 10 gene data sets show that the accuracy performance of GRRF is, in general, more robust than RRF when their parameters change. GRRF is computationally efficient, can select compact feature subsets, and has competitive accuracy performance, compared to RRF, varSelRF and LASSO logistic regression (with evaluations from an RF classifier). Also, RF applied to the features selected by RRF with the minimal regularization outperforms RF applied to all the features for most of the data sets considered here. Therefore, if accuracy is considered more important than the size of the feature subset, RRF with the minimal regularization may be considered. We use the accuracy performance of RF, a strong classifier, to evaluate feature selection methods, and illustrate that weak classifiers are less capable of capturing the information contained in a feature subset. Both RRF and GRRF were implemented in the ''RRF'' R package available at CRAN, the official R package archive.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine
Friedman, J. H. (2001) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1013203451 · Cited by 30,731
Gene selection for cancer classification using support vector machines
Guyon, I., Weston, J., Barnhill, S., & Vapnik, V. (2002) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1012487302797 · Cited by 9,954
Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer
van 't Veer, L. J., Dai, H., van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., Hart, A. A. M., Mao, M., Peterse, H. L., van der Kooy, K., Marton, M. J., Witteveen, A. T., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415530a · Cited by 9,536
Khan, J., Wei, J. S., Ringnér, M., Saal, L. H., Ladanyi, M., Westermann, F., Berthold, F., Schwab, M., Antonescu, C. R., Peterson, C., et al. (2001) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/89044 · Cited by 2,644
Predictive learning via rule ensembles
Friedman, J. H., & Popescu, B. E. (2008) · The Annals of Applied Statistics · doi:10.1214/07-aoas148 · Cited by 1,315
Cited by
Biau, G., & Scornet, E. (2016) · Test · doi:10.1007/s11749-016-0481-7 · Cited by 4,149
A comparison of random forest variable selection methods for classification prediction modeling
Speiser, J. L., Miller, M. E., Tooze, J., & Ip, E. (2019) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.028 · Cited by 1,561
Metadata
- Authors
- Deng, H., & Runger, G.
- Venue
- Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3483-3489
- ISSN
- 0031-3203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2022604714
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 6.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gene selection with guided regularized random forest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.patcog.2013.05.018
- The paper
- Deng, H., & Runger, G. (2013). Gene selection with guided regularized random forest. Pattern Recognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2013.05.018
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.