Cited by 129Artificial Intelligence in HealthcareMachine Learning and Data ClassificationData Mining and Machine Learning Applications

Application of Improved LightGBM Model in Blood Glucose Prediction

Open access
Wang, Yan, Wang, Tao·2020·Applied Sciences

Abstract

In recent years, with increasing social pressure and irregular schedules, many people have developed unhealthy eating habits, which has resulted in an increasing number of patients with diabetes, a disease that cannot be cured under the current medical conditions, and can only be mitigated by early detection and prevention. A lot of human and material resources are required for the detection of the blood glucose of a large number of people in medical examination, while the integrated learning model based on machine learning can quickly predict the blood glucose level and assist doctors in treatment. Therefore, an improved LightGBM model based on the Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization algorithm is proposed for the prediction of blood glucose, namely HY_LightGBM, which optimizes parameters using a Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization algorithm based on LightGBM. The Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization algorithm is a model-based method for finding the minimum value of the function so as to obtain the optimal parameters of the LightGBM model. Experiments have demonstrated that the parameters obtained by the Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization algorithm are superior to those obtained by a genetic algorithm and random search. The improved LightGBM model based on the Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization algorithm achieves a mean square error of 0.5961 in blood glucose prediction, with a higher accuracy than the XGBoost model and CatBoost model.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/app10093227

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • LGB uses a histogram-based decision tree approach, discretizing continuous features during the data-splitting process, and thereby allowing for effective management of sparse data.

    “Additionally, LGB uses a histogram-based decision tree approach, discretizing continuous features during the data-splitting process, and thereby allowing for effective management of sparse data.”

    From Machine learning-driven prediction model for successful weaning of patients from mechanical ventilation in ICU (2026) · cites this paper as [36]

    Section 2.1, “LightGBM Model” (page not provided), describes LightGBM’s histogram-based decision-tree strategy and says its histogram algorithm discretizes continuous features to find a split point. It also describes feature bundling, but does not say that the histogram-based discretization thereby enables effective management of sparse data. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • LGB is particularly well equipped to address the challenges posed by imbalanced datasets.

    “Furthermore, this model is particularly well equipped to address the challenges posed by imbalanced datasets.”

    From Machine learning-driven prediction model for successful weaning of patients from mechanical ventilation in ICU (2026) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Data Preprocessing section describes missing values and the training–test split, while the Introduction compares LightGBM with XGBoost on memory use and speed. Neither passage addresses performance on imbalanced datasets; searches for class imbalance, uneven sample distributions, and LightGBM sampling found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • One key advantage of LGB is its ability to handle mixed-type features, which helps preserve the true distribution of these variables within the model.

    “One key advantage of LGB is its ability to handle mixed-type features, this helps preserve the true distribution of these variables within the model.”

    From Machine learning-driven prediction model for successful weaning of patients from mechanical ventilation in ICU (2026) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Data Preprocessing section describes the dataset and how missing values were handled, while the LightGBM comparison passage reports model parameters and performance. Searches for mixed-type or categorical features and preservation of their distribution found no passage in our copy addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Wang, 2019, Application of cat boost model based on machine learning in prediction of severe HFMD, Chin. J. Infect. Control, 18, 18

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, Y., & Wang, T.
Affiliations
Lanzhou University of Technology (CN)
Corresponding author
Wang, Tao
Venue
Applied Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-05-06
Volume
10
Issue
9
Pages
3227
ISSN
2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3021916839
Cited by
129
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13
FWCI
8.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Key R & D plan of Gansu Province (18YF1GA060)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
blood glucose prediction, LightGBM, Bayesian hyperparameter optimization, diabetes mellitus, hyperparameter optimization, genetic algorithm comparison, random search comparison, XGBoost comparison

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