Abstract:Unsupervised feature selection is commonly formulated as a multiobjective optimisation problem that jointly optimises subset quality and subset size. Yet the behaviour of this formulation depends critically on the choice of evaluation objective, the direction of subset-size regularisation, and the initialisation strategy. We study these factors in a controlled setting using a synthetic dataset with known informative, redundant, and irrelevant feature types. Six formulations are compared by combining three evaluation objectives: accuracy, silhouette score, and PCA reconstruction loss with subset-size minimisation or maximisation. The results show that formulation strongly affects both search dynamics and the quality of the resulting Pareto front. Silhouette-based formulations exhibit a strong bias toward trivial low-cardinality solutions and remain weak proxies for predictive performance. In contrast, the proposed PCA loss objective produces compact subsets with test accuracy comparable to subsets obtained by directly optimising supervised accuracy. Overall, the study shows that objective design is central to effective multiobjective unsupervised feature selection.
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.21561 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2605.21561v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.21561 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
From: Mathieu Cherpitel [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 20 May 2026 15:14:00 UTC (1,462 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。