Key result
The weighted clustering approach achieved a classification accuracy of 90.08% for healthy cases, outperforming the linear search method (70.42%) and random clustering (86.09%).
Why the study?
Existing heart diagnosis approaches face increased search overhead and decision delays as learning data grows, while conventional data clustering remains limited with expanding training information.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A weighted clustering approach for heart disease diagnosis using the Cleveland dataset improves classification accuracy and reduces computation time compared to traditional linear search and random clustering methods.
An approach for heart diagnosis based on weighted clustering is presented in this paper. The existing heart diagnosis approach develops a decision based on correlation of feature vector of a querying sample with available knowledge to the system. With increase in the learning data to the system the search overhead increases. This tends to delay in decision making. The linear mapping is improved by the clustering process of large database information. However, the issue of data clustering is observed to be limited with increase in training information and characteristic of learning feature. To overcome the issue of accurate clustering, a weighted clustering approach based on gain factor is proposed. This approach updates the cluster information based on dual factor monitoring of distance and gain parameter. The presented approach illustrates an improvement in the mining performance in terms of accuracy, sensitivity and recall rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vasantrao et al. (2021) studied Heart disease. Weighted clustering approach vs. Linear search and random clustering was evaluated on Classification accuracy (Healthy case). The weighted clustering approach achieved a classification accuracy of 90.08% for healthy cases, outperforming the linear search method (70.42%) and random clustering (86.09%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: