{"title":"A Bayesian network interpretation of the Cox's proportional hazard model","authors":"Jidapa Kraisangka , Marek J. Druzdzel","doi":"10.1016/j.ijar.2018.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Cox's proportional hazards (CPH) model is quite likely the most popular modeling technique in survival analysis. While the CPH model is able to represent a relationship between a collection of risks and their common effect, Bayesian networks have become an attractive alternative with an increased modeling power and far broader applications. Our paper focuses on a Bayesian network interpretation of the CPH model (BN-Cox). We provide a method of encoding knowledge from existing CPH models in the process of knowledge engineering for Bayesian networks. This is important because in practice we often have CPH models available in the literature and no access to the original data from which they have been derived.</p><p>We compare the accuracy of the resulting BN-Cox model to the original CPH model, Kaplan–Meier estimate, and Bayesian networks learned from data, including Naive Bayes, Tree Augmented Naive Bayes, Noisy-Max, and parameter learning by means of the EM algorithm. BN-Cox model came out as the most accurate of all BN approaches and very close to the original CPH model.</p><p>We study two approaches for simplifying the BN-Cox model for the sake of representational and computational efficiency: (1) parent divorcing and (2) removing less important risk factors. We show that removing less important risk factors leads to smaller loss of accuracy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13842,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Approximate Reasoning","volume":"103 ","pages":"Pages 195-211"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ijar.2018.09.007","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Approximate Reasoning","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0888613X17306308","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
Cox's proportional hazards (CPH) model is quite likely the most popular modeling technique in survival analysis. While the CPH model is able to represent a relationship between a collection of risks and their common effect, Bayesian networks have become an attractive alternative with an increased modeling power and far broader applications. Our paper focuses on a Bayesian network interpretation of the CPH model (BN-Cox). We provide a method of encoding knowledge from existing CPH models in the process of knowledge engineering for Bayesian networks. This is important because in practice we often have CPH models available in the literature and no access to the original data from which they have been derived.
We compare the accuracy of the resulting BN-Cox model to the original CPH model, Kaplan–Meier estimate, and Bayesian networks learned from data, including Naive Bayes, Tree Augmented Naive Bayes, Noisy-Max, and parameter learning by means of the EM algorithm. BN-Cox model came out as the most accurate of all BN approaches and very close to the original CPH model.
We study two approaches for simplifying the BN-Cox model for the sake of representational and computational efficiency: (1) parent divorcing and (2) removing less important risk factors. We show that removing less important risk factors leads to smaller loss of accuracy.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Approximate Reasoning is intended to serve as a forum for the treatment of imprecision and uncertainty in Artificial and Computational Intelligence, covering both the foundations of uncertainty theories, and the design of intelligent systems for scientific and engineering applications. It publishes high-quality research papers describing theoretical developments or innovative applications, as well as review articles on topics of general interest.
Relevant topics include, but are not limited to, probabilistic reasoning and Bayesian networks, imprecise probabilities, random sets, belief functions (Dempster-Shafer theory), possibility theory, fuzzy sets, rough sets, decision theory, non-additive measures and integrals, qualitative reasoning about uncertainty, comparative probability orderings, game-theoretic probability, default reasoning, nonstandard logics, argumentation systems, inconsistency tolerant reasoning, elicitation techniques, philosophical foundations and psychological models of uncertain reasoning.
Domains of application for uncertain reasoning systems include risk analysis and assessment, information retrieval and database design, information fusion, machine learning, data and web mining, computer vision, image and signal processing, intelligent data analysis, statistics, multi-agent systems, etc.