Cited by 5,189Statistical Methods and InferenceText and Document Classification TechnologiesFace and Expression Recognition

A survey on feature selection methods

Chandrashekar, Girish, Sahin, Ferat·2014·Computers & Electrical Engineering

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2013.11.024

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 92 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chandrashekar, G., & Sahin, F.
Affiliations
Rochester Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Chandrashekar, Girish
Venue
Computers & Electrical Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-01
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
16-28
ISSN
0045-7906 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2167101736
Cited by
5,189
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 351 · 2025: 517 · 2024: 575 · 2023: 652 · 2022: 655 · 2021: 651 · 2020: 498 · 2019: 440 · 2018: 378 · 2017: 239 · 2016: 138 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 21 · 2012: 1
FWCI
68.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Electrical Engineering (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
Keywords
feature selection, high-dimensional data, filter methods, wrapper methods, embedded methods, dimensionality reduction, machine learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review