Anirudh Kamath

Anirudh Kamath, Dustin Maas, Jacobus Van der Merwe et al.

Data wrangling continues to be the most time-consuming task in the data science pipeline and wireless network data is no exception. Prior approaches for automatic or assisted data-wrangling primarily target unordered, single-table data. However, unlike traditional datasets where rows in a table are unordered and assumed to be independent of each other, wireless network datasets are often collected across multiple measurement devices, producing multiple, temporally ordered tables that must be integrated for obtaining the complete dataset. For instance, to create a dataset of the signal quality of 5G cell towers within a geographic region, GPS data collected by cellphones must be joined with radio frequency measurements of the corresponding cell towers. However, the join key timestamp typically exhibits mismatched sampling periods, causing a misalignment. Data wrangling techniques for generic time-series datasets also fail here, since they lack knowledge of domain-specific data semantics, which are often defined by network protocols and system configurations. To aid in wrangling wireless network datasets, we demonstrate WN-Wrangle, an interactive wrangling assistant, tailored to the wireless network domain that suggests the top-k next-best wrangling operations, along with rich, domain-specific explanations. Under the hood, WN-Wrangle enforces temporal constraints- and a wireless network semantics-aware mechanism to score and rank an extended set of wrangling operators to improve the data quality. We demonstrate how WN-Wrangle identifies elusive data-quality issues specific to the wireless network domain and suggests accurate wrangling steps over datasets obtained from the widely used POWDER city-scale wireless testbed.

Anirudh Kamath, Aditya Singh, Raj Ramnani et al.

Over 150,000 new people in the United States are diagnosed with colorectal cancer each year. Nearly a third die from it (American Cancer Society). The only approved noninvasive diagnosis tools currently involve fecal blood count tests (FOBTs) or stool DNA tests. Fecal blood count tests take only five minutes and are available over the counter for as low as \$15. They are highly specific, yet not nearly as sensitive, yielding a high percentage (25%) of false negatives (Colon Cancer Alliance). Moreover, FOBT results are far too generalized, meaning that a positive result could mean much more than just colorectal cancer, and could just as easily mean hemorrhoids, anal fissure, proctitis, Crohn's disease, diverticulosis, ulcerative colitis, rectal ulcer, rectal prolapse, ischemic colitis, angiodysplasia, rectal trauma, proctitis from radiation therapy, and others. Stool DNA tests, the modern benchmark for CRC screening, have a much higher sensitivity and specificity, but also cost \$600, take two weeks to process, and are not for high-risk individuals or people with a history of polyps. To yield a cheap and effective CRC screening alternative, a unique ensemble-based classification algorithm is put in place that considers the FIT result, BMI, smoking history, and diabetic status of patients. This method is tested under ten-fold cross validation to have a .95 AUC, 92% specificity, 89% sensitivity, .88 F1, and 90% precision. Once clinically validated, this test promises to be cheaper, faster, and potentially more accurate when compared to a stool DNA test.