Comparison of six multiclass classifiers by the use of different classification performance indicators

Journal of Chemometrics

Volumn 26, Issue 3-4, 2012, Pages 76-84

  Szöllosi, Dániel ^a   Dénes, Dénes Lajos ^a   Firtha, Ferenc ^a   Kovács, Zoltán ^a   Fekete, András ^a  

^a Institute of Data Analytics and Information Systems   (Hungary)

Author keywords

AUC; Classification accuracy; Classification performance; Cohen's kappa; Multiclass classifier; Sum of ranking differences

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; BEVERAGES; FORESTRY; MOTION COMPENSATION; NEAREST NEIGHBOR SEARCH;

AREA UNDER THE ROC CURVE; CLASSIFICATION ACCURACY; CLASSIFICATION METHODS; CLASSIFICATION PERFORMANCE; COHEN'S KAPPAS; MODEL SAMPLES; MULTI-CLASS CLASSIFIER; PERFORMANCE INDICATORS; SOFT DRINKS; SUM OF RANKING DIFFERENCE;

DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS;

EID: 84858750526     PISSN: 08869383     EISSN: 1099128X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cem.2432     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Brereton RG. Validation and optimization. In Chemometrics for Pattern Recognition. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, 2009; 311-391.
2. Arie B-D. Comparison of classification accuracy using Cohen's weighted kappa. Expert Syst. Appl. 2008; 34(2): 825-832.
3. Provost F, Fawcett T. Analysis and Visualisation of Classifier Performance: Comparison under Imprecise Class and Cost Distributions. AAAI: Huntington Beach, California, USA, 1997; 43-48.
4. Reed JF. Homogeneity of kappa statistics in multiple samples. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 2000; 63(1): 43-46.
5. Bradley AP. The use of the area under the roc curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognition 1997; 30(7): 1145-1159.
6. Hand DJ. Measuring classifier performance: a coherent alternative to the area under the ROC curve. Mach. Learn. 2009; 77(1): 103-123.
7. Marzban C. The ROC curve and the area under it as a performance measure. Weather. Forecast. 2004; 19(6): 1106-1114.
8. Héberger K, Kollár-Hunek K. Sum of ranking differences for method discrimination and its validation: comparison of ranks with random numbers. J. Chemom. 2010; 25(4): 151-158.
9. Dias LG, Peres AM, Barcelos TP, Morais JSA, Machado AASC. Semi-quantitative and quantitative analysis of soft drinks using an electronic tongue. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2011; 154(2): 111-118.
10. Kobayashi Y, Habara M, Ikezazki H, Chen RG, Naito Y, Toko K. Advanced taste sensors based on artificial lipids with global selectivity to basic taste qualities and high correlation to sensory scores. Sensors 2010; 10(4): 3411-3443.
11. Toko K. Biomimetic Sensor Technology. Cambridge University Press: New York, 2000.
12. Winquist F, Krantz-Rulcker C, Lundstrom I. Electronic tongues. MRS Bull. 2004; 29(10): 726-731.
13. Rudnitskaya A, Kirsanov D, Legin A, Beullens K, Lammertyn J, Nicolaǎz BM, Irudayaraj J. Analysis of apples varieties-comparison of electronic tongue with different analytical techniques. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2006; 116(1-2): 23-28.
14. AlphaM.O.S. αAstree sensor technical note. 2002.
15. AlphaM.O.S. αAstree electronic tongue user manual. 2003.
16. Kovacs Z, Sipos L, Szollosi D, Kokai Z, Szekely G, Fekete A. Electronic tongue and sensory evaluation for sensing apple juice taste attributes. Sens. Lett. 2011; 9(4): 1273-1281.
17. Brereton RG. Exploratory data analysis. In Chemometrics for Pattern Recognition. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, 2009; 47-104.
18. R. D. C. Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2011;.
19. Cortez P. rminer: Simpler use of data mining methods (e.g. NN and SVM) in classification and regression. R package version 1.1., 2011;.
20. Fisher RA. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Annals of Eugenics 1936; 7: 179-188.
21. Venables WN, Ripley BD. 12.1 Discriminant analysis. In Modern Applied Statistics with S. Springer: New York, 2002.
22. Richards E, Bessant C, Saini S. Multivariate data analysis in electroanalytical chemistry. Electroanalysis 2002; 14(22): 1533-1542.
23. Hagan M, Demuth H, Beale M. Neural Network Design. PWS Publishing: Boston, MA, 1996.
24. Berrueta LA, Alonso-Salces RM, Heberger K. Supervised pattern recognition in food analysis. Journal of Chromatography A 2007; 1158(1-2): 196-214.
25. Boser BE, Guyon IM, Vapnik VN. A Training Algorithm for Optimal Margin Classifiers. ACM Press: New York, 1992; 144-152.
26. Vapnik VN. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer-Verlag: New York, 1995.
27. Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ, Friedman J. The Elements of Statistical Learning. Data Mining Inference and Prediction. Springer-Verlag: New York, 2001.
28. Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP. Section 16.5. Support Vector Machines. In Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge University Press: New York, 2007; 978-0-521-88068-8.
29. Kollár-Hunek K, Héberger K. CRRN-DNA, Budapest, 2010;.
30. Bishop Pattern CM. Recognition and machine learning. In Information Science and Statistics, Jordan M, Kleinberg J, Schölkopf B (eds.). Springer: Singapore, 2006.