Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Jurnal SINTA 1

Hepatitis Diagnosis Using Case-Based Reasoning with Gradient Descent as Feature Weighting Method

Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Business Intelligence · Vol. 4 No. 1 (2018) · pp. 25–31

DOI
10.20473/jisebi.4.1.25-31
ISSN
2443-2555, 2598-6333
Published
2018-04-28
Publisher
Universitas Airlangga
Language
eng

Abstract

Retrieval is one of the stages in case-based reasoning system which find a solution to new problem or case by measuring the similarity between the new case and old cases in the case base. Some of the similarity measurement techniques are involving feature weights that show the importance of the feature in a case. Feature weights can be obtained from a domain expert or by using a feature weighting method either locally or globally. Gradient descent is the feature weighting method which computes global weights for each feature. This research implemented gradient descent to obtain feature weights in case-based reasoning for hepatitis diagnosis and the similarity measurement using weighted Euclidean distance. There are four variations number of case base and test data that used in this research, those are: the first variation using 50% of data as case base and 50% as test data second variation using 60% of data as case base and 40% as test data, third variation using 70% of data as case base and 30% as test data and fourth variation using 80% of data as case base and 20% as test data. For each variation, using 4 kinds of scenario to mark the test data those are in first scenario the test data mark at the end of data, in second scenario the test data mark at the begin of data, in third scenario the test data mark half at the begin and half at the end of data and in the fourth scenario the test data mark in the middle of data. The result of this research showed that the accuracy of the system reaches 100% at scenario 1 in variation 4. Overall of all four variations and four kinds of scenario, the average accuracy of the system was 77.55%, average recall of system was 69.74%, and the average of precision was 78.39%. In addition, the level of accuracy was also influenced by the number of case base and the scenario of case selection for the case base. This is because more cases in the case base, the chances of a system to finding similar cases will be more.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

20 authors · 31 co-authorship links · 8 across different organisations

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Universitas Gadjah Mada
  • University of Brawijaya
  • National Research and Innovation Agency
  • Sumatera Institute of Technology
  • Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Arief IchwaniSumatera Institute of Technology1
Windyaning UstyannieUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Devi Valentino WaasUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Muhammad Faqih DzulqarnainUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Faizal MakhrusUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Wahyono WahyonoUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Yaqutina Marjani SantosaUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Agung PambudiUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Nasution NasutionUniversitas Gadjah Mada1
Yusi Tyroni MursityoUniversity of Brawijaya1
Muhammad GhiffariUniversity of Brawijaya1
Yurizka Melia SariUniversitas Negeri Surabaya1
Janu ArlinwibowoNational Research and Innovation Agency1
Gupita Nadindra FatimaAffiliation unknown1
Dwi PurwokoNational Research and Innovation Agency1
San Afri AwangAffiliation unknown1
Ahmad MaryudiAffiliation unknown1
Wahyu WardhanaAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://e-journal.unair.ac.id/JISEBI/oai, first harvested 29 Okt 2026, last seen 1 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">Hepatitis Diagnosis Using Case-Based Reasoning with Gradient Descent as Feature Weighting Method</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Bagi, Yufika Sari</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Suprapto, Suprapto</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Case-Based Reasoning</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Gradient Descent</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Feature Weighting</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Hepatitis Diagnosis</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">Retrieval is one of the stages in case-based reasoning system which find a solution to new problem or case by measuring the similarity between the new case and old cases in the case base. Some of the similarity measurement techniques are involving feature weights that show the importance of the feature in a case. Feature weights can be obtained from a domain expert or by using a feature weighting method either locally or globally. Gradient descent is the feature weighting method which computes global weights for each feature. This research implemented gradient descent to obtain feature weights in case-based reasoning for hepatitis diagnosis and the similarity measurement using weighted Euclidean distance. There are four variations number of case base and test data that used in this research, those are: the first variation using 50% of data as case base and 50% as test data second variation using 60% of data as case base and 40% as test data, third variation using 70% of data as case base and 30% as test data and fourth variation using 80% of data as case base and 20% as test data. For each variation, using 4 kinds of scenario to mark the test data those are in first scenario the test data mark at the end of data, in second scenario the test data mark at the begin of data, in third scenario the test data mark half at the begin and half at the end of data and in the fourth scenario the test data mark in the middle of data. The result of this research showed that the accuracy of the system reaches 100% at scenario 1 in variation 4. Overall of all four variations and four kinds of scenario, the average accuracy of the system was 77.55%, average recall of system was 69.74%, and the average of precision was 78.39%. In addition, the level of accuracy was also influenced by the number of case base and the scenario of case selection for the case base. This is because more cases in the case base, the chances of a system to finding similar cases will be more.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Airlangga</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2018-04-28</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://e-journal.unair.ac.id/JISEBI/article/view/7532</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.20473/jisebi.4.1.25-31</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Business Intelligence; Vol. 4 No. 1 (2018): April; 25-31</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2443-2555</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2598-6333</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://e-journal.unair.ac.id/JISEBI/article/view/7532/4809</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2018 The Authors. Published by Universitas Airlangga.</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>