Intelligent System to Classify Peanuts Varieties Using K-Nearest Neighbors (K-NN) and Support Vector Machine (SVM)

2019 ◽  
pp. 359-368
Author(s):  
V. G. Narendra ◽  
K. Govardhan Hegde
Keyword(s):  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Intelligent System ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors

scholarly journals Técnicas de aprendizaje de máquina utilizadas para la minería de texto

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (71) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Ángel Freddy Godoy Viera
Keyword(s):  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Naive Bayes ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Naïve Bayes ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Self Organizing Maps ◽  
Self Organizing

Las técnicas de aprendizaje de máquina continúan siendo muy utilizadas para la minería de texto. Para este artículo se realizó una revisión de literatura en periódicos científicos publicados en los años de 2010 y 2011, con el objetivo de identificar las principales formas de aprendizaje de máquina empleadas para la minería de texto. Se utilizó estadística descriptiva para organizar, resumir y analizar los datos encontrados, y se presentó una descripción resumida de las principales encontradas. En los artículos analizados se hallaron 13 aplicadas para la minería de texto, el 83% de los artículos mencionaban de 1 a 3 técnicas de aprendizaje de máquina, las principales usadas por los autores en los artículos estudiados fueron support vector machine (svm), k-means (k-m),k-nearest neighbors (k-nn), naive bayes (nb), self-organizing maps (som). Los pares que aparecen con mayor frecuencia son svm/nb, svm/k-nn, svm/decission tree.

scholarly journals Analisis Perbandingan Algoritma SVM, KNN, dan CNN untuk Klasifikasi Citra Cuaca

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 311
Author(s):  
Mohammad Farid Naufal
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Machine Learning ◽  
Computer Vision ◽  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Convolutional Neural Network ◽  
Cross Validation ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Classification Algorithms ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors

<p class="Abstrak">Cuaca merupakan faktor penting yang dipertimbangkan untuk berbagai pengambilan keputusan. Klasifikasi cuaca manual oleh manusia membutuhkan waktu yang lama dan inkonsistensi. <em>Computer vision</em> adalah cabang ilmu yang digunakan komputer untuk mengenali atau melakukan klasifikasi citra. Hal ini dapat membantu pengembangan <em>self autonomous machine</em> agar tidak bergantung pada koneksi internet dan dapat melakukan kalkulasi sendiri secara <em>real time</em>. Terdapat beberapa algoritma klasifikasi citra populer yaitu K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), dan Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). KNN dan SVM merupakan algoritma klasifikasi dari <em>Machine Learning</em> sedangkan CNN merupakan algoritma klasifikasi dari Deep Neural Network. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan performa dari tiga algoritma tersebut sehingga diketahui berapa gap performa diantara ketiganya. Arsitektur uji coba yang dilakukan adalah menggunakan 5 cross validation. Beberapa parameter digunakan untuk mengkonfigurasikan algoritma KNN, SVM, dan CNN. Dari hasil uji coba yang dilakukan CNN memiliki performa terbaik dengan akurasi 0.942, precision 0.943, recall 0.942, dan F1 Score 0.942.</p><p class="Abstrak"> </p><p class="Abstrak"><em><strong>Abstract</strong></em></p><p class="Abstract"><em>Weather is an important factor that is considered for various decision making. Manual weather classification by humans is time consuming and inconsistent. Computer vision is a branch of science that computers use to recognize or classify images. This can help develop self-autonomous machines so that they are not dependent on an internet connection and can perform their own calculations in real time. There are several popular image classification algorithms, namely K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). KNN and SVM are Machine Learning classification algorithms, while CNN is a Deep Neural Networks classification algorithm. This study aims to compare the performance of that three algorithms so that the performance gap between the three is known. The test architecture is using 5 cross validation. Several parameters are used to configure the KNN, SVM, and CNN algorithms. From the test results conducted by CNN, it has the best performance with 0.942 accuracy, 0.943 precision, 0.942 recall, and F1 Score 0.942.</em></p><p class="Abstrak"><em><strong><br /></strong></em></p>

scholarly journals Diagnosis of Melanoma Based on the Sparse Auto-Encoder for Feature Extraction

2020 ◽  
pp. 220-230
Author(s):  
Nadia Smaoui Zghal ◽  
Marwa Zaabi ◽  
Houda Derbel
Keyword(s):  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Feature Extraction ◽  
Support Vector Machine Classifier ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Suspected Case ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Unsupervised Deep Learning ◽  
Sparse Autoencoder ◽  
Experimental Findings

Aims: Skin cancer is a fairly critical disease all over the world and especially in Western countries and America. However, if it is perceived and treated early, it is quite often curable. The main risk factors for melanoma are exposure to UV rays, the presence of many moles, and heredity. For this reason, this work focuses on the issue of automatic diagnosis of melanoma. The aim is to extract significant features from pixels of the images based on an unsupervised deep learning technique which is the sparse autoencoder method. Methodology: A preprocessing phase is required to remove the artifacts and enhance the contrast of the images before proceeding with the feature extraction. Once the characteristics are extracted automatically, the support vector machine classifier and the k-nearest neighbors are applied for the classification phase. The objective is to differentiate between 3 categories: melanoma, suspected case, and non-melanoma. Finally, the PH2 database is used to test the proposed approaches (200 images are presented in this dataset: 80 atypical nevi, 80 common nevi, and 40 melanoma). Results: The obtained results in terms of specificity, accuracy, and sensitivity present noticeable performances with the support vector machine classifier (achieved 94 % overall accuracy) and the k-nearest neighbors (92 %). Conclusion: This study's experimental findings showed that the best performance was obtained by the approach based on a deep sparse autoencoder combined with support vector machine.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of support vector machine and k-nearest neighbors with a pyramidal histogram of the gradient for sign language detection

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-118
Author(s):  
Imantoko Imantoko ◽  
◽  
Arief Hermawan ◽  
Donny Avianto ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Computation Time ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Hand Movements ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Communication Method ◽  
Level 3

The communication method using sign language is very efficient considering that the speed of information delivery is closer to verbal communication (speaking) compared to writing or typing. Because of this, sign language is often used by people who are deaf, speech impaired, and normal people to communicate. To make sign language translation easier, a system is needed to translate symbols formed from hand movements (in the form of images) into text or sound. This study aims to compare performance such as accuracy and computation time of Support Vector Machine (SVM) and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) with Pyramidal Histogram of Gradient (PHOG) for feature extraction, to know which one is better at recognizing sign language. Yield, both combined methods PHOG-SVM and PHOG-KNN can recognize images from hand movements that form certain symbols. The system built using the SVM classification produces the highest accuracy of 82% at PHOG level 3, while the system built with the KNN classification produces the highest accuracy of 78% at PHOG level 2. The total computation time of the fastest training and testing by the SVM model is 236.53 seconds at PHOG level 3, while the KNN model is 78.27 seconds at PHOG level 3. In terms of accuracy, PHOG-SVM is better, but in terms of computation time, PHOG-KNN takes the place.

scholarly journals A study and identification of COVID-19 viruses using N-grams with Naïve Bayes, K-Nearest Neighbors, Artificial Neural Networks, Decision tree and Support Vector Machine

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed El Boujnouni
Keyword(s):  
Neural Networks ◽  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
Artificial Neural Networks ◽  
Decision Tree ◽  
Naive Bayes ◽  
Nearest Neighbors ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
K Nearest Neighbors ◽  
The World ◽  
Artificial Neural

Abstract Coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19 is a global health crisis caused by a virus officially named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and well known with the acronym (SARS-CoV-2). This very contagious illness has severely impacted people and business all over the world and scientists are trying so far to discover all useful information about it, including its potential origin(s) and inter-host(s). This study is a part of this scientific inquiry and it aims to identify precisely the origin(s) of a large set of genomes of SARS-COV-2 collected from different geographic locations in all over the world. This research is performed through the combination of five powerful techniques of machine learning (Naïve Bayes, K-Nearest Neighbors, Artificial Neural Networks, Decision tree and Support Vector Machine) and a widely known tool of language modeling (N-grams). The experimental results have shown that the majority of techniques gave the same global results concerning the origin(s) and inter-host(s) of SARS-COV-2. These results demonstrated that this virus has one zoonotic source which is Pangolin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document