KGroups: A Versatile Univariate Max-Relevance Min-Redundancy Feature Selection Algorithm for High-dimensional Biological Data
Organizations: Computer Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. · ADAPT Centre, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. · Computer Science, University of Galway, Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Abstract
This paper proposes a new univariate filter feature selection (FFS) algorithm called KGroups. The majority of work in the literature focuses on investigating the relevance or redundancy estimations of feature selection (FS) methods. This has shown promising results and a real improvement of FFS methods' predictive performance. However, limited efforts have been made to investigate alternative FFS algorithms. This raises the following question: how much of the FFS methods' predictive performance depends on the selection algorithm rather than the relevance or the redundancy estimations? The majority of FFS methods fall into two categories: relevance maximisation (Max-Rel, also known as KBest) or simultaneous relevance maximisation and redundancy minimisation (mRMR). KBest is a univariate FFS algorithm that employs sorting (descending) for selection. mRMR is a multivariate FFS algorithm that employs an incremental search algorithm for selection. In this paper, we propose a new univariate mRMR called KGroups that employs clustering for selection. Extensive experiments on 14 high-dimensional biological benchmark datasets showed that KGroups achieves similar predictive performance compared to multivariate mRMR while being up to 821 times faster. KGroups is parameterisable, which leaves room for further predictive performance improvement through hyperparameter finetuning, unlike mRMR and KBest. KGroups outperforms KBest.
Figures & tables
| Type | Predic-tive Perfor-mance | Compu-tational Cost | Genera-lisation to other models | Example Methods | Short Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Filters | Low | Low | High | SelectKBest; SelectPercentile | - Perform feature selection at pre-processing without relying on ML model - Use statistics, information theory, or geometry to measure relevance and redundancy - Model-agnostic approach |
| Wrappers | High | High | Low | Forward Selection; Backward Selection; Recursive Selection; Exhaustive Selection | - Integrate variable selection into training process - Evaluate subsets based on predictive performance - Can use SHAP values, permutation importance - Assigned values can be negative |
| Embedded | Medium | Medium | Medium | Gini and Information Gain Importance | - Use ML models with built-in feature selection - Tied to specific models (e.g. tree-based models) - Assign importance values during training - Non-relevant features often assigned zero |
| Name | #Instances | #Features | #Classes |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALLAML | 72 | 7129 | 2 |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 111 | 11340 | 3 |
| Carcinom | 174 | 9182 | 11 |
| GLI_85 | 85 | 22283 | 2 |
| GLIOMA | 50 | 4434 | 4 |
| Prostate_GE | 102 | 5966 | 2 |
| Actual | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive (P) | Negative (N) | |||
| Predicted | Positive (P) | True Positive (TP) | False Positive (FP) | |
| Negative (N) | False Negative (FN) | True Negative (TN) | ||
| Gini importance | Mutual info. | F-value | |||||
| Dataset | All feat. | KBest | KGroups | KBest | KGroups | KBest | KGroups |
| ALLAML | 95.91 | 100.00* | 100.00* | 98.57 | 100.00* | 98.57 | 100.00* |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 73.82 | 88.26* | 88.22 | 84.66 | 84.66 | 71.15 | 79.21 |
| Carcinom | 95.47 | 94.82 | 96.54* | 95.38 | 95.39 | 92.52 | 77.01 |
| GLIOMA | 78.00 | 98.00* | 96.00 | 90.00 | 94.00 | 88.00 | 90.00 |
| GLI_85 | 84.62 | 95.29 | 98.82* | 96.47 | 98.82* | 95.29 | 97.65 |
| Gini importance | Mutual info. | F-value | |||||
| Dataset | All feat. | mRMR | KGroups | mRMR | KGroups | mRMR | KGroups |
| ALLAML | 95.91 | 100.00* | 100.00* | 100.00* | 100.00* | 100.00* | 100.00* |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 73.82 | 91.86* | 88.22 | 90.04 | 84.66 | 85.57 | 79.21 |
| Carcinom | 95.47 | 95.98 | 96.54 | 96.55* | 95.39 | 95.97 | 77.01 |
| GLIOMA | 78.00 | 94.00 | 96.00* | 90.00 | 94.00 | 88.00 | 90.00 |
| GLI_85 | 84.62 | 96.47 | 98.82* | 97.65 | 98.82* | 97.65 | 97.65 |
| Gini import. | Mutual info. | F-value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dataset | All feat. | KBest | KG | KBest | KG | KBest | KG |
| ALLAML | 87.88 | 98.36 | 99.56* | 97.43 | 99.33 | 96.98 | 98.33 |
| 7.31 | 1.37 | 1.09 | 2.21 | 1.12 | 2.03 | 1.41 | |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 65.39 | 85.28 | 85.99* | 78.96 | 80.00 | 65.62 | 73.36 |
| 6.38 | 2.50 | 1.68 | 4.41 | 2.64 | 4.58 | 4.19 | |
| Carcinom | 85.13 | 86.88 | 90.41* | 87.26 | 89.82 | 81.93 | 69.05 |
| Gini import. | Mutual info. | F-value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dataset | All feat. | mRMR | KG | mRMR | KG | mRMR | KG |
| ALLAML | 87.88 | 98.16 | 99.56* | 99.10 | 99.33 | 98.13 | 98.33 |
| 7.31 | 1.45 | 1.09 | 0.70 | 1.12 | 2.11 | 1.41 | |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 65.39 | 88.12* | 85.99 | 85.14 | 80.00 | 81.05 | 73.36 |
| 6.38 | 2.75 | 1.68 | 3.35 | 2.64 | 5.67 | 4.19 | |
| Carcinom | 85.13 | 90.41* | 90.41* | 90.22 | 89.82 | 89.82 | 69.05 |
| Gini import. | Mutual info. | F-value | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dataset | KG | RFCQ | KB | KG | MID | MIQ | KB | KG | FCD | FCQ | KB |
| ALLAML | 180 | 5,952 | 186 | 186 | 52,448 | 52,432 | 192 | 184 | 5,878 | 5,864 | 176 |
| CLL_SUB_111 | 234 | 9,600 | 275 | 253 | 94,996 | 94,983 | 271 | 233 | 9,434 | 9,425 | 245 |
| Carcinom | 552 | 8,307 | 917 | 752 | 96,504 | 94,879 | 746 | 28 | 8,004 | 7,998 | 660 |
| GLIOMA | 196 | 3,757 | 188 | 204 | 31,009 | 30,729 | 206 | 189 | 3,695 | 3,691 | 193 |
| GLI_85 | 193 | 18,635 | 239 | 204 | 168,077 | 167,806 | 237 | 203 | 18,261 | 18,257 | 191 |