View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Single and Ensemble Based Filters in Environmental Data.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Single and Ensemble Based Filters in Environmental Data.
Authors: Cherif, Yousra1 (AUTHOR), Idri, Ali1 (AUTHOR) ali.idri@um5.ac.ma
Source: Expert Systems. Jul2025, Vol. 42 Issue 7, p1-56. 56p.
Subjects: Ensemble learning, Subset selection, Machine learning, Species distribution, Random forest algorithms
Abstract: Researchers rely on species distribution models (SDMs) to establish a correlation between species occurrence records and environmental data. These models offer insights into the ecological and evolutionary aspects of the subject. Feature selection (FS) aims to choose useful interlinked features or remove unnecessary and redundant ones and make the induced model easier to understand. Although feature selection plays a crucial role in SDMs, only a limited number of studies in the literature have addressed it with several key shortcomings such as lack of the use of multivariate techniques, lack of comparison between the univariate and the multivariate filters, and absence of a comparison between the ensemble univariate and multivariate filters. Therefore, this study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation consisting of assessing and comparing six filter‐based univariate feature selection methods using two thresholds with two multivariate techniques, as well as four classifiers: Extreme Gradient boosting (XGB), Random Forest (RF), Decision Tree (DT), and Light gradient‐boosting machine (LGBM). Furthermore, the current study proposes a novel approach for ensemble construction consisting of evaluating the applications of ensemble learning using 40% of features ranked by means of Borda Count and Reciprocal Rank (univariate filter ensembles) as well as the fusion‐based and the intersection‐based ensembles (multivariate filter ensembles). Moreover, we evaluated and compared the performances of univariate and multivariate techniques with their ensembles. Similarly, we evaluated and compared the performances of the best ensemble techniques across datasets. The empirical evaluations involve several techniques, such as the 5‐fold cross‐validation method, the Scott Knott (SK) test, and Borda Count. In addition, we used three performance metrics (accuracy, Kappa, and F1‐score). Experiments showed that Consistency‐based subset selection in conjunction with RF outperformed all other univariate and multivariate FS techniques with an accuracy value of 91.63% across all datasets. However, Fisher score trained with RF was the best choice when considering the number of features. Moreover, the univariate or multivariate based ensembles, in general, outperformed their singles. In addition, when comparing the univariate and multivariate ensembles, the fusion‐based ensemble outperformed all other ensembles achieving an accuracy of 91.77% when using RF across datasets. Nevertheless, in terms of performance and number of features, the ensemble constructed using Reciprocal Rank performed better than all other FS techniques regardless of the classifier used. It achieved an accuracy of 91.61% across datasets when using RF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Expert Systems is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: egs
DbLabel: Engineering Source
An: 185964187
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Single and Ensemble Based Filters in Environmental Data.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cherif%2C+Yousra%22">Cherif, Yousra</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Idri%2C+Ali%22">Idri, Ali</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> ali.idri@um5.ac.ma</i>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Expert+Systems%22">Expert Systems</searchLink>. Jul2025, Vol. 42 Issue 7, p1-56. 56p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ensemble+learning%22">Ensemble learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Subset+selection%22">Subset selection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Machine+learning%22">Machine learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Species+distribution%22">Species distribution</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Random+forest+algorithms%22">Random forest algorithms</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Researchers rely on species distribution models (SDMs) to establish a correlation between species occurrence records and environmental data. These models offer insights into the ecological and evolutionary aspects of the subject. Feature selection (FS) aims to choose useful interlinked features or remove unnecessary and redundant ones and make the induced model easier to understand. Although feature selection plays a crucial role in SDMs, only a limited number of studies in the literature have addressed it with several key shortcomings such as lack of the use of multivariate techniques, lack of comparison between the univariate and the multivariate filters, and absence of a comparison between the ensemble univariate and multivariate filters. Therefore, this study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation consisting of assessing and comparing six filter‐based univariate feature selection methods using two thresholds with two multivariate techniques, as well as four classifiers: Extreme Gradient boosting (XGB), Random Forest (RF), Decision Tree (DT), and Light gradient‐boosting machine (LGBM). Furthermore, the current study proposes a novel approach for ensemble construction consisting of evaluating the applications of ensemble learning using 40% of features ranked by means of Borda Count and Reciprocal Rank (univariate filter ensembles) as well as the fusion‐based and the intersection‐based ensembles (multivariate filter ensembles). Moreover, we evaluated and compared the performances of univariate and multivariate techniques with their ensembles. Similarly, we evaluated and compared the performances of the best ensemble techniques across datasets. The empirical evaluations involve several techniques, such as the 5‐fold cross‐validation method, the Scott Knott (SK) test, and Borda Count. In addition, we used three performance metrics (accuracy, Kappa, and F1‐score). Experiments showed that Consistency‐based subset selection in conjunction with RF outperformed all other univariate and multivariate FS techniques with an accuracy value of 91.63% across all datasets. However, Fisher score trained with RF was the best choice when considering the number of features. Moreover, the univariate or multivariate based ensembles, in general, outperformed their singles. In addition, when comparing the univariate and multivariate ensembles, the fusion‐based ensemble outperformed all other ensembles achieving an accuracy of 91.77% when using RF across datasets. Nevertheless, in terms of performance and number of features, the ensemble constructed using Reciprocal Rank performed better than all other FS techniques regardless of the classifier used. It achieved an accuracy of 91.61% across datasets when using RF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Expert Systems is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=185964187
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/exsy.70076
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 56
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Ensemble learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Subset selection
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Machine learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Species distribution
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Random forest algorithms
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Single and Ensemble Based Filters in Environmental Data.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cherif, Yousra
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Idri, Ali
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Text: Jul2025
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 02664720
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 42
            – Type: issue
              Value: 7
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Expert Systems
              Type: main
ResultId 1