2014
DOI: 10.2478/amcs-2014-0009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A differential evolution approach to dimensionality reduction for classification needs

Abstract: The feature selection problem often occurs in pattern recognition and, more specifically, classification. Although these patterns could contain a large number of features, some of them could prove to be irrelevant, redundant or even detrimental to classification accuracy. Thus, it is important to remove these kinds of features, which in turn leads to problem dimensionality reduction and could eventually improve the classification accuracy. In this paper an approach to dimensionality reduction based on differen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the experiments, Hepatitis, Liver-Disorders, and Diabetes datasets from the UCI Repository are used, and the classification accuracies of the proposed system are observed as 94.92%, 74.81%, and 79.29%, respectively. Martinoyić et al (2014) propose a wrapper approach based on DE for dimensionality reduction in which the feature subsets that are discovered by DE are evaluated by using a kNN classifier. The classification A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T accuracies for the proposed approach and some other optimization algorithms such as Angle Modulated DE (AMDE), GA, and DE are compared on twelve datasets from UCI Repository.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the experiments, Hepatitis, Liver-Disorders, and Diabetes datasets from the UCI Repository are used, and the classification accuracies of the proposed system are observed as 94.92%, 74.81%, and 79.29%, respectively. Martinoyić et al (2014) propose a wrapper approach based on DE for dimensionality reduction in which the feature subsets that are discovered by DE are evaluated by using a kNN classifier. The classification A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T accuracies for the proposed approach and some other optimization algorithms such as Angle Modulated DE (AMDE), GA, and DE are compared on twelve datasets from UCI Repository.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Babu and Munawar (2007) indicated DE/best/1/bin as one of the most promising DE strategies, although the best scheme remains problem dependent and the authors find DE/best/2 more effective for the type of problems treated in this work. Recent developments regarding DE optimization techniques and applications can be found in the works of Price et al (2005), Chakraborty (2008) and Martinović et al (2014). Only few applications of DE to structural engineering can be found, for instance, the ones of Savoia and Vincenzi (2008) or Reed et al (2013).…”
Section: Optimal Identification Of the Support Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In such circumstances, some of the extracted features may be less relevant or unusable as well as redundant for portraying the activity [7]. These features are considered less meaningful in the sense that they possibly can increase the incorrect classification rate [8]. On the other hand, differential evolution (DE) is broadly employed to generate the feature subsets [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%