Machine Learning

1 readers

1 users here now

Community Rules:

Be nice. No offensive behavior, insults or attacks: we encourage a diverse community in which members feel safe and have a voice.
Make your post clear and comprehensive: posts that lack insight or effort will be removed. (ex: questions which are easily googled)
Beginner or career related questions go elsewhere. This community is focused in discussion of research and new projects that advance the state-of-the-art.
Limit self-promotion. Comments and posts should be first and foremost about topics of interest to ML observers and practitioners. Limited self-promotion is tolerated, but the sub is not here as merely a source for free advertisement. Such posts will be removed at the discretion of the mods.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

communick@academy.garden

[D] Pregnancy in a multi gender model (alien.top)

submitted 10 months ago by Gadod_mais@alien.top to c/machinelearning@academy.garden

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hey guys, begginers doubt:

I am preparing a dataframe for a machine learning model. The purpose of the model is to predict whether people infected with COVID will die or not.

To do this, I am looking for some conditions and symptoms, such as sore throat, cough, comorbidities, gender, and others, and binarizing them into "yes" or "no" or "male" and "female".

I have a problem. One of the variables is "pregnant", but only individuals of the female sex can be pregnant. How can I deal with this variable?

Can I keep it in the dataframe and assign the value "not pregnant" to all male individuals? Or could this harm the model?

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] deeceeo@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

It likely won't matter. Most models (e.g. I'm guessing something like xgboost) can deal robustly with these types of correlations.

If you like, you can combine the two into a single variable and may get slightly improved performance (0 for male, 1 for female and 2 for pregnant female) assuming the dataset can fit the rule (e.g. trans men). This way, a tree-based model could draw a boundary between 0 and 1 based on gender or 1 and 2 based on pregnancy.

[–] 314per@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Keep in mind that it is possible but rare for men to be pregnant (eg trans men, some kind of intersex people).

https://www.healthline.com/health/transgender/can-men-get-pregnant#if-you-have-a-uterus-and-ovaries

[–] Pyrite_Pro@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Trans men, you mean… women?

[–] pan_berbelek@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And of course you get downvoted.. the virus devours peoples minds.

[–] Pyrite_Pro@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Didn’t expect anything else…

[–] liquidInkRocks@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

It's been nice having you on Reddit, but prepare to be banned. They don't tolerate any variance from the Progressive mindset.

[–] UnusualClimberBear@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Usually adding a L1/L2 regularization is an efficient way to deal with correlated variables

[–] VoidRippah@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The purpose of the model is to predict whether people infected with COVID will die or not.

There is no need for all that effort, I can tell you with 100% accuracy that they will day for certain. Just like those who where not infected. /s

[–] grudev@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

TIL: ML redditors don't understand sarcasm or the downsides of "accuracy" in model evaluation.

[–] mathbbR@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

As others have said, pregnant men, while uncommon, might appear in your dataset. However, for preliminary results, it could make sense to exclude the possibility. Depending on the prevalence and impact of pregnancy in your data, you may be free to drop the column entirely. Some exploratory data analysis should help. Pregnancy should be relatively frequent (>5% of rows, at the very least). Pregnant women should also have noticably different target statistics than non-pregnant women. If pregnancy is rare or doesn't seem to have much of an impact, feel free to drop it altogether for now.

Alternatively, I would default to basic indicator columns for both sex and pregnancy. Just be sure your model doesn't require feature independence, as some do.

[–] tw_f@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I'd just set it to False when sex="M" as men can't get pregnant and if you have a True value anywhere in that column it's probably an annotation error.

This is the most pragmatic solution I guess.