aiqbench analysis
This study compares mutual information and data-based sensitivity analysis for feature selection in customer targeting, concluding that both methods remain valid depending on the trade-off between false positives and feature count. While the application is a standard telemarketing scenario, the core contribution lies in evaluating mathematical techniques for optimizing predictive models, which is central to machine learning workflows.
Mutual information and sensitivity analysis for feature selection in customer targeting: a comparative study
arXiv:2608.20447v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Feature selection is a highly relevant task in a data-driven knowledge discovery project. Several techniques have been developed aiming at finding the features that influence most an outcome to predict, including mutual information and, in recent years, the data-based sensitivity analysis. The present research focus on analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of each of these two techniques, by applying both to a bank telemarketing case. Thereafter, a logistic regression model is built on the tuned set of features identified by each of the two techniques as the most influencing set of features on the success of a telemarketing contact, in a total of 13 features for mutual information and 9 features for the data-based sensitivity analysis. The latter performs better for lower values of false positives while the former is slightly better for a higher false positive ratio. Thus, mutual information becomes a better choice if bank managers intend to reduce slightly the cost of contacts without risking losing a high number of successes. Such results show that mutual information, although not recent, is still a valid method for feature selection. On the other side, the data-based sensitivity analysis selection achieved good prediction results with less features.
Abstract:Feature selection is a highly relevant task in a data-driven knowledge discovery project. Several techniques have been developed aiming at finding the features that influence most an outcome to predict, including mutual information and, in recent years, the data-based sensitivity analysis. The present research focus on analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of each of these two techniques, by applying both to a bank telemarketing case. Thereafter, a logistic regression model is built on the tuned set of features identified by each of the two techniques as the most influencing set of features on the success of a telemarketing contact, in a total of 13 features for mutual information and 9 features for the data-based sensitivity analysis. The latter performs better for lower values of false positives while the former is slightly better for a higher false positive ratio. Thus, mutual information becomes a better choice if bank managers intend to reduce slightly the cost of contacts without risking losing a high number of successes. Such results show that mutual information, although not recent, is still a valid method for feature selection. On the other side, the data-based sensitivity analysis selection achieved good prediction results with less features.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Probability (math.PR)
arXiv:2608.20447 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2608.20447v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.20447 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Barraza, N., Moro, S., Ferreyra, M., & de la Peña, A. (2019). Mutual information and sensitivity analysis for feature selection in customer targeting: A comparative study. Journal of Information Science, 45(1), 53-67
https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551518770967 DOI(s) linking to related resources
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 255 words
Related coverage

Stock Market Today Highlights, Sept 2: Sensex ends 373 pts lower at 76, 570, Nifty below 24, 000; Asian Paints, HDFC Bank fall most
thehindubusinessline.com · Sep 2, 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · Oct 13, 2026