scholarly journals EEG-Based Classification of the Driver Alertness State

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 353-356
Author(s):  
Martin Golz ◽  
Sebastian Thomas ◽  
Adolf Schenka
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Gradient Boosting ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Weighting Matrix ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Young Drivers ◽  
Eeg Data ◽  
Vector Machines ◽  
Generalized Matrix

AbstractGMLVQ (Generalized Matrix Relevance Learning Vector Quantization) is a method of machine learning with an adaptive metric. While training, the prototype vectors as well as the weight matrix of the metric are adapted simultaneously. The method is presented in more detail and compared with other machine learning methods employing a fixed metric. It was investigated how accurately the methods can assign the 6-channel EEG of 25 young drivers, who drove overnight in the simulation lab, to the two classes of mild and severe drowsiness. Results of cross-validation show that GMLVQ is at 81.7 ± 1.3 % mean classification accuracy. It is not as accurate as support-vector machines (SVM) and gradient boosting machines (GBM) and cannot exploit the potential of learning adaptive metrics in the case of EEG data. However, information is provided on the relevance of each signal feature from the weighting matrix.

The impact of different parameter sets on the classification of asteroid types

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Klimczak ◽  
Wojciech Kotłowski ◽  
Dagmara Oszkiewicz ◽  
Francesca DeMeo ◽  
Agnieszka Kryszczyńska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gradient Boosting ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Multilayer Perceptrons ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Vector Machines ◽  
Science Centre ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Impact

<p>The aim of the project is the classification of asteroids according to the most commonly used asteroid taxonomy (Bus-Demeo et al. 2009) with the use of various machine learning methods like Logistic Regression, Naive Bayes, Support Vector Machines, Gradient Boosting and Multilayer Perceptrons. Different parameter sets are used for classification in order to compare the quality of prediction with limited amount of data, namely the difference in performance between using the 0.45mu to 2.45mu spectral range and multiple spectral features, as well as performing the Prinicpal Component Analysis to reduce the dimensions of the spectral data.</p> <p> </p> <p>This work has been supported by grant No. 2017/25/B/ST9/00740 from the National Science Centre, Poland.</p>

scholarly journals BENCHMARK OF MACHINE LEARNING METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF A SENTINEL-2 IMAGE

2016 ◽  
Vol XLI-B7 ◽  
pp. 335-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Pirotti ◽  
F. Sunar ◽  
M. Piragnolo
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Land Cover ◽  
Cross Validation ◽  
Training Dataset ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Control Dataset ◽  
Vector Machines ◽  
Sentinel 2

Thanks to mainly ESA and USGS, a large bulk of free images of the Earth is readily available nowadays. One of the main goals of remote sensing is to label images according to a set of semantic categories, i.e. image classification. This is a very challenging issue since land cover of a specific class may present a large spatial and spectral variability and objects may appear at different scales and orientations. <br><br> In this study, we report the results of benchmarking 9 machine learning algorithms tested for accuracy and speed in training and classification of land-cover classes in a Sentinel-2 dataset. The following machine learning methods (MLM) have been tested: linear discriminant analysis, k-nearest neighbour, random forests, support vector machines, multi layered perceptron, multi layered perceptron ensemble, ctree, boosting, logarithmic regression. The validation is carried out using a control dataset which consists of an independent classification in 11 land-cover classes of an area about 60 km<sup>2</sup>, obtained by manual visual interpretation of high resolution images (20 cm ground sampling distance) by experts. In this study five out of the eleven classes are used since the others have too few samples (pixels) for testing and validating subsets. The classes used are the following: (i) urban (ii) sowable areas (iii) water (iv) tree plantations (v) grasslands. <br><br> Validation is carried out using three different approaches: (i) using pixels from the training dataset (<i>train</i>), (ii) using pixels from the training dataset and applying cross-validation with the k-fold method (<i>kfold</i>) and (iii) using all pixels from the control dataset. Five accuracy indices are calculated for the comparison between the values predicted with each model and control values over three sets of data: the training dataset (train), the whole control dataset (<i>full</i>) and with k-fold cross-validation (<i>kfold</i>) with ten folds. Results from validation of predictions of the whole dataset (<i>full</i>) show the random forests method with the highest values; kappa index ranging from 0.55 to 0.42 respectively with the most and least number pixels for training. The two neural networks (multi layered perceptron and its ensemble) and the support vector machines - with default radial basis function kernel - methods follow closely with comparable performance.

scholarly journals BENCHMARK OF MACHINE LEARNING METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF A SENTINEL-2 IMAGE

2016 ◽  
Vol XLI-B7 ◽  
pp. 335-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Pirotti ◽  
F. Sunar ◽  
M. Piragnolo
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Land Cover ◽  
Cross Validation ◽  
Training Dataset ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Control Dataset ◽  
Vector Machines ◽  
Sentinel 2

Thanks to mainly ESA and USGS, a large bulk of free images of the Earth is readily available nowadays. One of the main goals of remote sensing is to label images according to a set of semantic categories, i.e. image classification. This is a very challenging issue since land cover of a specific class may present a large spatial and spectral variability and objects may appear at different scales and orientations. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; In this study, we report the results of benchmarking 9 machine learning algorithms tested for accuracy and speed in training and classification of land-cover classes in a Sentinel-2 dataset. The following machine learning methods (MLM) have been tested: linear discriminant analysis, k-nearest neighbour, random forests, support vector machines, multi layered perceptron, multi layered perceptron ensemble, ctree, boosting, logarithmic regression. The validation is carried out using a control dataset which consists of an independent classification in 11 land-cover classes of an area about 60 km&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, obtained by manual visual interpretation of high resolution images (20 cm ground sampling distance) by experts. In this study five out of the eleven classes are used since the others have too few samples (pixels) for testing and validating subsets. The classes used are the following: (i) urban (ii) sowable areas (iii) water (iv) tree plantations (v) grasslands. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; Validation is carried out using three different approaches: (i) using pixels from the training dataset (&lt;i&gt;train&lt;/i&gt;), (ii) using pixels from the training dataset and applying cross-validation with the k-fold method (&lt;i&gt;kfold&lt;/i&gt;) and (iii) using all pixels from the control dataset. Five accuracy indices are calculated for the comparison between the values predicted with each model and control values over three sets of data: the training dataset (train), the whole control dataset (&lt;i&gt;full&lt;/i&gt;) and with k-fold cross-validation (&lt;i&gt;kfold&lt;/i&gt;) with ten folds. Results from validation of predictions of the whole dataset (&lt;i&gt;full&lt;/i&gt;) show the random forests method with the highest values; kappa index ranging from 0.55 to 0.42 respectively with the most and least number pixels for training. The two neural networks (multi layered perceptron and its ensemble) and the support vector machines - with default radial basis function kernel - methods follow closely with comparable performance.

scholarly journals Identification of Predictor Genes for Feed Efficiency in Beef Cattle by Applying Machine Learning Methods to Multi-Tissue Transcriptome Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weihao Chen ◽  
Pâmela A. Alexandre ◽  
Gabriela Ribeiro ◽  
Heidge Fukumasu ◽  
Wei Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Feed Efficiency ◽  
Gradient Boosting ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Extreme Gradient Boosting ◽  
High Feed ◽  
Differential Gene

Machine learning (ML) methods have shown promising results in identifying genes when applied to large transcriptome datasets. However, no attempt has been made to compare the performance of combining different ML methods together in the prediction of high feed efficiency (HFE) and low feed efficiency (LFE) animals. In this study, using RNA sequencing data of five tissues (adrenal gland, hypothalamus, liver, skeletal muscle, and pituitary) from nine HFE and nine LFE Nellore bulls, we evaluated the prediction accuracies of five analytical methods in classifying FE animals. These included two conventional methods for differential gene expression (DGE) analysis (t-test and edgeR) as benchmarks, and three ML methods: Random Forests (RFs), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and combination of both RF and XGBoost (RX). Utility of a subset of candidate genes selected from each method for classification of FE animals was assessed by support vector machine (SVM). Among all methods, the smallest subsets of genes (117) identified by RX outperformed those chosen by t-test, edgeR, RF, or XGBoost in classification accuracy of animals. Gene co-expression network analysis confirmed the interactivity existing among these genes and their relevance within the network related to their prediction ranking based on ML. The results demonstrate a great potential for applying a combination of ML methods to large transcriptome datasets to identify biologically important genes for accurately classifying FE animals.

Identifying Cancer Targets Based on Machine Learning Methods via Chou’s 5-steps Rule and General Pseudo Components

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (25) ◽  
pp. 2301-2317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruirui Liang ◽  
Jiayang Xie ◽  
Chi Zhang ◽  
Mengying Zhang ◽  
Hai Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Growth Rate ◽  
Big Data ◽  
Human Genome Project ◽  
Genome Project ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Learning Methods ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Vector Machines

In recent years, the successful implementation of human genome project has made people realize that genetic, environmental and lifestyle factors should be combined together to study cancer due to the complexity and various forms of the disease. The increasing availability and growth rate of ‘big data’ derived from various omics, opens a new window for study and therapy of cancer. In this paper, we will introduce the application of machine learning methods in handling cancer big data including the use of artificial neural networks, support vector machines, ensemble learning and naïve Bayes classifiers.

scholarly journals Predictive modeling for peri-implantitis by using machine learning techniques

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoaki Mameno ◽  
Masahiro Wada ◽  
Kazunori Nozaki ◽  
Toshihito Takahashi ◽  
Yoshitaka Tsujioka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Risk Indicators ◽  
Machine Learning Techniques ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Complex Interactions ◽  
Learning Techniques ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Vector Machines

AbstractThe purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to create a model for predicting the onset of peri-implantitis by using machine learning methods and to clarify interactions between risk indicators. This study evaluated 254 implants, 127 with and 127 without peri-implantitis, from among 1408 implants with at least 4 years in function. Demographic data and parameters known to be risk factors for the development of peri-implantitis were analyzed with three models: logistic regression, support vector machines, and random forests (RF). As the results, RF had the highest performance in predicting the onset of peri-implantitis (AUC: 0.71, accuracy: 0.70, precision: 0.72, recall: 0.66, and f1-score: 0.69). The factor that had the most influence on prediction was implant functional time, followed by oral hygiene. In addition, PCR of more than 50% to 60%, smoking more than 3 cigarettes/day, KMW less than 2 mm, and the presence of less than two occlusal supports tended to be associated with an increased risk of peri-implantitis. Moreover, these risk indicators were not independent and had complex effects on each other. The results of this study suggest that peri-implantitis onset was predicted in 70% of cases, by RF which allows consideration of nonlinear relational data with complex interactions.

scholarly journals MODIS-FIRMS and ground-truthing based wildfire likelihood mapping of Sikkim Himalaya using machine learning algorithms.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polash Banerjee
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Machine Learning Algorithms ◽  
Tree Cover ◽  
Anthropogenic Factors ◽  
Gradient Boosting ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Learning Methods ◽  
Sikkim Himalaya ◽  
Environmental Features ◽  
Machine Learning Methods

Abstract Wildfires in limited extent and intensity can be a boon for the forest ecosystem. However, recent episodes of wildfires of 2019 in Australia and Brazil are sad reminders of their heavy ecological and economical costs. Understanding the role of environmental factors in the likelihood of wildfires in a spatial context would be instrumental in mitigating it. In this study, 14 environmental features encompassing meteorological, topographical, ecological, in situ and anthropogenic factors have been considered for preparing the wildfire likelihood map of Sikkim Himalaya. A comparative study on the efficiency of machine learning methods like Generalized Linear Model (GLM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF) and Gradient Boosting Model (GBM) has been performed to identify the best performing algorithm in wildfire prediction. The study indicates that all the machine learning methods are good at predicting wildfires. However, RF has outperformed, followed by GBM in the prediction. Also, environmental features like average temperature, average wind speed, proximity to roadways and tree cover percentage are the most important determinants of wildfires in Sikkim Himalaya. This study can be considered as a decision support tool for preparedness, efficient resource allocation and sensitization of people towards mitigation of wildfires in Sikkim.

Using Remote Monitoring and Machine Learning to Classify Slam Events of Wave Piercing Catamarans

2021 ◽  
Vol 163 (A3) ◽  
Author(s):  
B Shabani ◽  
J Ali-Lavroff ◽  
D S Holloway ◽  
S Penev ◽  
D Dessi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Monitoring System ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Feature Space ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Acceleration Threshold ◽  
Vector Machines ◽  
Structural Responses ◽  
As Stress

An onboard monitoring system can measure features such as stress cycles counts and provide warnings due to slamming. Considering current technology trends there is the opportunity of incorporating machine learning methods into monitoring systems. A hull monitoring system has been developed and installed on a 111 m wave piercing catamaran (Hull 091) to remotely monitor the ship kinematics and hull structural responses. Parallel to that, an existing dataset of a similar vessel (Hull 061) was analysed using unsupervised and supervised learning models; these were found to be beneficial for the classification of bow entry events according to key kinematic parameters. A comparison of different algorithms including linear support vector machines, naïve Bayes and decision tree for the bow entry classification were conducted. In addition, using empirical probability distributions, the likelihood of wet-deck slamming was estimated given a vertical bow acceleration threshold of 1  in head seas, clustering the feature space with the approximate probabilities of 0.001, 0.030 and 0.25.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document