Fuzzy Decision-Making Framework for Evaluating Hybrid Detection Models of Trauma Patients

IF 3 4区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Expert Systems Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1111/exsy.70005
Rula A. Hamid, Idrees A. Zahid, A. S. Albahri, O. S. Albahri, A. H. Alamoodi, Laith Alzubaidi, Iman Mohamad Sharaf, Shahad Sabbar Joudar, YuanTong Gu, Z. T. Al-qaysi
{"title":"Fuzzy Decision-Making Framework for Evaluating Hybrid Detection Models of Trauma Patients","authors":"Rula A. Hamid,&nbsp;Idrees A. Zahid,&nbsp;A. S. Albahri,&nbsp;O. S. Albahri,&nbsp;A. H. Alamoodi,&nbsp;Laith Alzubaidi,&nbsp;Iman Mohamad Sharaf,&nbsp;Shahad Sabbar Joudar,&nbsp;YuanTong Gu,&nbsp;Z. T. Al-qaysi","doi":"10.1111/exsy.70005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This study introduces a new multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework to evaluate trauma injury detection models in intensive care units (ICUs). This research addresses the challenges associated with diverse machine learning (ML) models, inconsistencies, conflicting priorities, and the importance of metrics. The developed methodology consists of three phases: dataset identification and pre-processing, hybrid model development, and an evaluation/benchmarking framework. Through meticulous pre-processing, the dataset is tailored to focus on adult trauma patients. Forty hybrid models were developed by combining eight ML algorithms with four filter-based feature-selection methods and principal component analysis (PCA) as a dimensionality reduction method, and these models were evaluated using seven metrics. The weight coefficients for these metrics are determined using the 2-tuple Linguistic Fermatean Fuzzy-Weighted Zero-Inconsistency (2TLF-FWZIC) method. The <i>Vlsekriterijumska Optimizcija I Kompromisno Resenje</i> (VIKOR) approach is applied to rank the developed models. According to 2TLF-FWZIC, classification accuracy (CA) and precision obtained the highest importance weights of 0.2439 and 0.1805, respectively, while F1, training time, and test time obtained the lowest weights of 0.1055, 0.0886, and 0.1111, respectively. The benchmarking results revealed the following top-performing models: the Gini index with logistic regression (GI-LR), the Gini index with a decision tree (GI_DT), and the information gain with a decision tree (IG_DT), with VIKOR Q score values of 0.016435, 0.023804, and 0.042077, respectively. The proposed MCDM framework is assessed and examined using systematic ranking, sensitivity analysis, validation of the best-selected model using two unseen trauma datasets, and mode explainability using the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method. We benchmarked the proposed methodology against three other benchmark studies and achieved a score of 100% across six key areas. The proposed methodology provides several insights into the empirical synthesis of this study. It contributes to advancing medical informatics by enhancing the understanding and selection of trauma injury detection models for ICUs.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51053,"journal":{"name":"Expert Systems","volume":"42 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Systems","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/exsy.70005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study introduces a new multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework to evaluate trauma injury detection models in intensive care units (ICUs). This research addresses the challenges associated with diverse machine learning (ML) models, inconsistencies, conflicting priorities, and the importance of metrics. The developed methodology consists of three phases: dataset identification and pre-processing, hybrid model development, and an evaluation/benchmarking framework. Through meticulous pre-processing, the dataset is tailored to focus on adult trauma patients. Forty hybrid models were developed by combining eight ML algorithms with four filter-based feature-selection methods and principal component analysis (PCA) as a dimensionality reduction method, and these models were evaluated using seven metrics. The weight coefficients for these metrics are determined using the 2-tuple Linguistic Fermatean Fuzzy-Weighted Zero-Inconsistency (2TLF-FWZIC) method. The Vlsekriterijumska Optimizcija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) approach is applied to rank the developed models. According to 2TLF-FWZIC, classification accuracy (CA) and precision obtained the highest importance weights of 0.2439 and 0.1805, respectively, while F1, training time, and test time obtained the lowest weights of 0.1055, 0.0886, and 0.1111, respectively. The benchmarking results revealed the following top-performing models: the Gini index with logistic regression (GI-LR), the Gini index with a decision tree (GI_DT), and the information gain with a decision tree (IG_DT), with VIKOR Q score values of 0.016435, 0.023804, and 0.042077, respectively. The proposed MCDM framework is assessed and examined using systematic ranking, sensitivity analysis, validation of the best-selected model using two unseen trauma datasets, and mode explainability using the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method. We benchmarked the proposed methodology against three other benchmark studies and achieved a score of 100% across six key areas. The proposed methodology provides several insights into the empirical synthesis of this study. It contributes to advancing medical informatics by enhancing the understanding and selection of trauma injury detection models for ICUs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Systems
Expert Systems 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
266
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: Expert Systems: The Journal of Knowledge Engineering publishes papers dealing with all aspects of knowledge engineering, including individual methods and techniques in knowledge acquisition and representation, and their application in the construction of systems – including expert systems – based thereon. Detailed scientific evaluation is an essential part of any paper. As well as traditional application areas, such as Software and Requirements Engineering, Human-Computer Interaction, and Artificial Intelligence, we are aiming at the new and growing markets for these technologies, such as Business, Economy, Market Research, and Medical and Health Care. The shift towards this new focus will be marked by a series of special issues covering hot and emergent topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信