2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2004.12.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On learning algorithm selection for classification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
187
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 317 publications
(189 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
187
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Here, three types of training algorithms having eight training functions have been evaluated for classification of brain hematoma. They are Gradient Descent algorithms (traingd, traingdm, trainrp), Conjugate Gradient algorithms (trainscg, traincgf, traincgp), Quasi-Newton algorithms (trainbfg,trainlm) [8].…”
Section: Training Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, three types of training algorithms having eight training functions have been evaluated for classification of brain hematoma. They are Gradient Descent algorithms (traingd, traingdm, trainrp), Conjugate Gradient algorithms (trainscg, traincgf, traincgp), Quasi-Newton algorithms (trainbfg,trainlm) [8].…”
Section: Training Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, performance measurement is essential for model selection, i.e. to identify the most suited classification technique as well as to tune the respective parameters (Ali and Smith, 2006). It has been shown that traditional performance measures such as the Gini coefficient, the KS statistic, and the AUC measure are inappropriate in many cases and may lead to incorrect conclusions (Hand, 2005(Hand, , 2009), since they do not always properly take into account the business reality of credit scoring.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MLAs from five classes are chosen so as to introduce a certain degree of variation among the classifiers, i.e. they should not make identical or correlated errors [13]. The justification behind choosing these MLAs are next discussed.…”
Section: Machine Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%