SoutheastCon 2015 2015
DOI: 10.1109/secon.2015.7132997
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing dimensionality reduction techniques

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Joshi and Machchhar [18] conduct a comprehensive survey on DR methods and proposed a DR method that depends upon the given set of parameters and varying conditions [18]. The authors investigate that recursive feature elimination, and genetic and evolutionary feature weighting and selection give better classification result than PCA [19].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Joshi and Machchhar [18] conduct a comprehensive survey on DR methods and proposed a DR method that depends upon the given set of parameters and varying conditions [18]. The authors investigate that recursive feature elimination, and genetic and evolutionary feature weighting and selection give better classification result than PCA [19].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PCA is one of the feature extraction techniques for extracting important features (called components) from a large set of the dataset [1,18]. With the PCA techniques, a set-off element in the low dimensional dataset is extricated from a high-dimensional dataset in a bid to get the maximum of information.…”
Section: Principle Component Analysis (Pca)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…used unsupervised learning for acoustic emission signals to identify the presence and location of damage and then switched to supervised learning to identify the type and severity of faults. [ 11 ] These methods are able to identify the fault types and have a strong resistance to overfitting, but they are unable to achieve the desired detection effect and have poor robustness when facing the complex background environment of wind power airports. Deng et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[10] Nick et al used unsupervised learning for acoustic emission signals to identify the presence and location of damage and then switched to supervised learning to identify the type and severity of faults. [11] These methods are able to identify the fault types and have a strong resistance to overfitting, but they are unable to achieve the desired detection effect and have poor robustness when facing the complex background environment of wind power airports. Deng et al proposed an adaptive filter based on improved LPSO algorithm and log-Gabor filter using HOG+SVM classifier to determine the types of defects in wind turbine blade images, and the method can effectively obtain the feature information of defects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%