2012 Second International Conference on Instrumentation, Measurement, Computer, Communication and Control 2012
DOI: 10.1109/imccc.2012.180
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Capability Analysis on the Characteristic Selection Algorithm of Text Categorization Based on F1 Measure Value

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two scenarios are constructed to track the triangle and asymmetric dodecagon targets, respectively. In order to test the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method, we compare the STGP-PHD filter with its corresponding smoothing filter and the PHD based on GP model in the number of targets, the mean shape precision Pu, the mean shape recall Ru, F1-Measure value [28] and COT, where…”
Section: Performance Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Two scenarios are constructed to track the triangle and asymmetric dodecagon targets, respectively. In order to test the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method, we compare the STGP-PHD filter with its corresponding smoothing filter and the PHD based on GP model in the number of targets, the mean shape precision Pu, the mean shape recall Ru, F1-Measure value [28] and COT, where…”
Section: Performance Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two scenarios are constructed to track the triangle and asymmetric dodecagon targets, respectively. In order to test the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method, we compare the STGP‐PHD filter with its corresponding smoothing filter and the PHD based on GP model in the number of targets, the mean shape precision Pu , the mean shape recall Ru , F1‐Measure value [28] and COT, where Pu=1NMCfalsetruei=1NMCArea()TjiEjiArea()Eji $Pu=\frac{1}{{N}_{MC}}\sum\limits _{i=1}^{{N}_{MC}}\frac{Area\left({T}_{j}^{i}\cap {E}_{j}^{i}\right)}{Area\left({E}_{j}^{i}\right)}$ Ru=1NMCfalsetruei=1NMCArea()TjiEjiArea()Tji $Ru=\frac{1}{{N}_{MC}}\sum\limits _{i=1}^{{N}_{MC}}\frac{Area\left({T}_{j}^{i}\cap {E}_{j}^{i}\right)}{Area\left({T}_{j}^{i}\right)}$ Tji ${T}_{j}^{i}$ represents the real shape of the target, Eji ${E}_{j}^{i}$ represents the estimated shape of the target, Area ( a ) is the area of a , and N MC represents the number of MC experiments. (Algorithm 1).…”
Section: Simulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As F-score takes both recall and precision into consideration, these metrics were not used to evaluate the algorithms separately [33]. F-score is deemed more appropriate to evaluate the performance of the classifications as it presents the weighted average of precision and recall [34], [35] Table 2 depicts the results of the sentiment analysis for the English tweets.…”
Section: 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑦 = 𝑇𝑃 + 𝑇𝑁 𝑇𝑃 + 𝑇𝑁 + 𝐹𝑃 + 𝐹𝑁mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Normally, measure is applied as a better measure of accuracy, defined in Eq. 3 with (Shaojun et al, 2012):…”
Section: For Driver Behaviour Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%