A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2017 |
Other Authors: | , |
Language: | eng |
Source: | Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
Download full: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/13292 |
Summary: | The performance of data-driven models such as Artificial Neural Networks and Support Vector Machines relies to a good extent on selecting proper data throughout the design phase. This paper addresses a comparison of four unsupervised data selection methods including random, convex hull based, entropy based and a hybrid data selection method. These methods were evaluated on eight benchmarks in classification and regression problems. For classification, Support Vector Machines were used, while for the regression problems, Multi-Layer Perceptrons were employed. Additionally, for each problem type, a non-dominated set of Radial Basis Functions Neural Networks were designed, benefiting from a Multi Objective Genetic Algorithm. The simulation results showed that the convex hull based method and the hybrid method involving convex hull and entropy, obtain better performance than the other methods, and that MOGA designed RBFNNs always perform better than the other models. (C) 2017, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
id |
RCAP_441f0cbb4ee6e8afc7a51f27fe7fb976 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/13292 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository_id_str |
https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160 |
spelling |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machinesEvolutionary algorithmsMultiobjective optimizationThe performance of data-driven models such as Artificial Neural Networks and Support Vector Machines relies to a good extent on selecting proper data throughout the design phase. This paper addresses a comparison of four unsupervised data selection methods including random, convex hull based, entropy based and a hybrid data selection method. These methods were evaluated on eight benchmarks in classification and regression problems. For classification, Support Vector Machines were used, while for the regression problems, Multi-Layer Perceptrons were employed. Additionally, for each problem type, a non-dominated set of Radial Basis Functions Neural Networks were designed, benefiting from a Multi Objective Genetic Algorithm. The simulation results showed that the convex hull based method and the hybrid method involving convex hull and entropy, obtain better performance than the other methods, and that MOGA designed RBFNNs always perform better than the other models. (C) 2017, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Elsevier ScienceSapientiaKhosravani, Hamid RezaRuano, AntonioFerreira, P. M.2019-11-20T15:07:58Z20172017-01-01T00:00:00Zconference objectinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/13292eng2405-896310.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1577info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2025-02-18T17:22:53Zoai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/13292Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T20:20:20.289505Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
title |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
spellingShingle |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines Khosravani, Hamid Reza Evolutionary algorithms Multiobjective optimization |
title_short |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
title_full |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
title_fullStr |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
title_full_unstemmed |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
title_sort |
A comparison of four data selection methods for artificial neural networks and support vector machines |
author |
Khosravani, Hamid Reza |
author_facet |
Khosravani, Hamid Reza Ruano, Antonio Ferreira, P. M. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Ruano, Antonio Ferreira, P. M. |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Sapientia |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Khosravani, Hamid Reza Ruano, Antonio Ferreira, P. M. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Evolutionary algorithms Multiobjective optimization |
topic |
Evolutionary algorithms Multiobjective optimization |
description |
The performance of data-driven models such as Artificial Neural Networks and Support Vector Machines relies to a good extent on selecting proper data throughout the design phase. This paper addresses a comparison of four unsupervised data selection methods including random, convex hull based, entropy based and a hybrid data selection method. These methods were evaluated on eight benchmarks in classification and regression problems. For classification, Support Vector Machines were used, while for the regression problems, Multi-Layer Perceptrons were employed. Additionally, for each problem type, a non-dominated set of Radial Basis Functions Neural Networks were designed, benefiting from a Multi Objective Genetic Algorithm. The simulation results showed that the convex hull based method and the hybrid method involving convex hull and entropy, obtain better performance than the other methods, and that MOGA designed RBFNNs always perform better than the other models. (C) 2017, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z 2019-11-20T15:07:58Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
conference object |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/13292 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/13292 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
2405-8963 10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1577 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Science |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier Science |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
collection |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
info@rcaap.pt |
_version_ |
1833598608883056640 |