Dynamic selection approaches for multiple classifier systems

被引:86
作者
Cavalin, Paulo R. [1 ]
Sabourin, Robert [2 ]
Suen, Ching Y. [3 ]
机构
[1] UFT, BR-77001090 Palmas, TO, Brazil
[2] ETS, Montreal, PQ H3C 1K3, Canada
[3] Concordia Univ, Ctr Pattern Recognit & Machine Intelligence CENPA, Montreal, PQ H3G 1M8, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Multiple classifier systems; Adaptive system; Dynamic selection; Incremental learning; Multistage organizations; Ensembles of classifiers; ACCURACY; COMBINATION; ALGORITHMS; ENSEMBLE; LIMITS;
D O I
10.1007/s00521-011-0737-9
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
In this paper we propose a new approach for dynamic selection of ensembles of classifiers. Based on the concept named multistage organizations, the main objective of which is to define a multi-layer fusion function adapted to each recognition problem, we propose dynamic multistage organization (DMO), which defines the best multistage structure for each test sample. By extending Dos Santos et al.'s approach, we propose two implementations for DMO, namely DSA (m) and DSA (c) . While the former considers a set of dynamic selection functions to generalize a DMO structure, the latter considers contextual information, represented by the output profiles computed from the validation dataset, to conduct this task. The experimental evaluation, considering both small and large datasets, demonstrated that DSA (c) dominated DSA (m) on most problems, showing that the use of contextual information can reach better performance than other existing methods. In addition, the performance of DSA (c) can also be enhanced in incremental learning. However, the most important observation, supported by additional experiments, is that dynamic selection is generally preferred over static approaches when the recognition problem presents a high level of uncertainty.
引用
收藏
页码:673 / 688
页数:16
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [11] Decision templates for multiple classifier fusion: an experimental comparison
    Kuncheva, LI
    Bezdek, JC
    Duin, RPW
    [J]. PATTERN RECOGNITION, 2001, 34 (02) : 299 - 314
  • [12] Kuncheva LI, 2000, KES'2000: FOURTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON KNOWLEDGE-BASED INTELLIGENT ENGINEERING SYSTEMS & ALLIED TECHNOLOGIES, VOLS 1 AND 2, PROCEEDINGS, P185, DOI 10.1109/KES.2000.885788
  • [13] Milgram J, 2007, THESIS ECOLE TECHNOL
  • [14] Automatic recognition of handwritten numerical strings: A recognition and verification strategy
    Oliveira, LS
    Sabourin, R
    Bortolozzi, F
    Suen, CY
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PATTERN ANALYSIS AND MACHINE INTELLIGENCE, 2002, 24 (11) : 1438 - 1454
  • [15] AUTOMATED DESIGN OF LINEAR TREE CLASSIFIERS
    PARK, Y
    SKLANSKY, J
    [J]. PATTERN RECOGNITION, 1990, 23 (12) : 1393 - 1412
  • [16] Radtke P, 2006, THESIS ETS MONTREAL
  • [17] New initial basic probability assignments for multiple classifiers
    Rhéaume, F
    Jousselme, AL
    Grenier, D
    Bossé, É
    Valin, P
    [J]. SIGNAL PROCESSING, SENSOR FUSION, AND TARGET RECOGNITION XI, 2002, 4729 : 319 - 328
  • [18] Classifier selection for majority voting
    Ruta, Dymitr
    Gabrys, Bogdan
    [J]. Information Fusion, 2005, 6 (01) : 63 - 81
  • [19] A theoretical analysis of the limits of Majority Voting errors for Multiple Classifier Systems
    Ruta, D
    Gabrys, B
    [J]. PATTERN ANALYSIS AND APPLICATIONS, 2002, 5 (04) : 333 - 350
  • [20] An experimental comparison of neural and statistical non-parametric algorithms for supervised classification of remote-sensing images
    Serpico, SB
    Bruzzone, L
    Roli, F
    [J]. PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, 1996, 17 (13) : 1331 - 1341