Tinjauan Literatur : Komparasi Certainty Factor dan Naïve Bayes untuk Diagnosis Penyakit
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36312/b2f43293Keywords:
Certainty Factor, Naïve Bayes, Diagnosis Penyakit, Sistem Pakar, Kecerdasan Buatan, Kajian LiteraturAbstract
Penelitian ini merupakan kajian literatur yang bertujuan menganalisis dan membandingkan metode Certainty Factor (CF) dan Naïve Bayes (NB) dalam pengembangan sistem diagnosis penyakit berbasis kecerdasan buatan. Kedua metode tersebut digunakan untuk meningkatkan akurasi dan efisiensi proses pengambilan keputusan dalam sistem pakar medis. Metode CF menerapkan pendekatan inferensi berbasis aturan untuk mengelola ketidakpastian melalui nilai tingkat keyakinan, sedangkan NB menggunakan prinsip probabilistik yang efektif dalam klasifikasi data medis berskala besar. Analisis dilakukan terhadap artikel ilmiah terpilih yang diterbitkan dalam lima tahun terakhir dan membahas penerapan kedua metode pada berbagai kasus diagnosis penyakit, termasuk diabetes, kanker, dan gangguan hormonal. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa CF lebih sesuai untuk sistem pakar dengan basis pengetahuan eksplisit dan kebutuhan interpretasi tinggi, sedangkan NB menunjukkan performa yang lebih unggul pada data dengan distribusi statistik yang jelas dan volume besar. Perbandingan dilakukan berdasarkan tiga indikator utama, yaitu akurasi, kompleksitas implementasi, dan kemudahan interpretasi hasil. Temuan penelitian ini diharapkan menjadi acuan dalam pemilihan metode yang tepat untuk pengembangan sistem pakar diagnosis penyakit di bidang ilmu komputer dan kesehatan digital, sekaligus memperkuat penerapan kecerdasan buatan dalam mendukung diagnosis medis yang efisien dan berbasis data.
This study presents a literature review aimed at analyzing and comparing the Certainty Factor (CF) and Naïve Bayes (NB) methods in the development of artificial intelligence–based disease diagnosis systems. Both methods are employed to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of decision-making processes in medical expert systems. The CF method applies a rule-based inference approach to handle uncertainty using confidence values, whereas NB employs a probabilistic approach that is effective for large-scale medical data classification. The analysis was conducted on selected scientific articles published within the last five years, discussing the implementation of both methods in various disease diagnosis cases, including diabetes, cancer, and hormonal disorders. The results indicate that CF is more suitable for expert systems requiring explicit knowledge representation and high interpretability, while NB demonstrates superior performance in scenarios involving large data volumes with well-defined statistical distributions. The comparison focuses on three main indicators: accuracy, implementation complexity, and result interpretability. The findings are expected to serve as a reference for selecting appropriate methods in developing medical expert diagnosis systems within the fields of computer science and digital health, and to strengthen the application of artificial intelligence in supporting data-driven and efficient medical diagnostics.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anis Wijayanti , Luqman Luqman, Herman Bedi Agtriadi

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Journal of Authentic Research agree to the following terms:
- For all articles published in Journal of Authentic Research, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agrees to implement a non-exclusive transfer of publishing rights to the journals.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.