The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Feature Selection for Classification of Hyperspectral Data by SVM
Open accessAbstract
Support vector machines (SVM) are attractive for the classification of remotely sensed data with some claims that the method is insensitive to the dimensionality of the data and, therefore, does not require a dimensionality-reduction analysis in preprocessing. Here, a series of classification analyses with two hyperspectral sensor data sets reveals that the accuracy of a classification by an SVM does vary as a function of the number of features used. Critically, it is shown that the accuracy of a classification may decline significantly (at 0.05 level of statistical significance) with the addition of features, particularly if a small training sample is used. This highlights a dependence of the accuracy of classification by an SVM on the dimensionality of the data and, therefore, the potential value of undertaking a feature-selection analysis prior to classification. Additionally, it is demonstrated that, even when a large training sample is available, feature selection may still be useful. For example, the accuracy derived from the use of a small number of features may be noninferior (at 0.05 level of significance) to that derived from the use of a larger feature set providing potential advantages in relation to issues such as data storage and computational processing costs. Feature selection may, therefore, be a valuable analysis to include in preprocessing operations for classification by an SVM.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory
Vapnik, V. N. (1995) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2440-0 · Cited by 39,138
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
Gene selection for cancer classification using support vector machines
Guyon, I., Weston, J., Barnhill, S., & Vapnik, V. (2002) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1012487302797 · Cited by 9,954
Neural Networks and the Bias/Variance Dilemma
Geman, S., Bienenstock, E., & Doursat, R. (1992) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1992.4.1.1 · Cited by 3,578 · cited 1×
“[38] used the biasvariance dilemma [41] to suggest that the classifiers with local kernel would require exponentially large training data set to have the same level of classification error in high-dimensional”
Method
Cited by
Deep learning based feature selection for remote sensing scene classification
Zou, Q., Ni, L., Zhang, T., & Wang, Q. (2015) · IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2015.2475299 · Cited by 956
Analysis of machine learning techniques for heart failure readmissions
Mortazavi, B. J., Downing, N. S., Bucholz, E. M., Dharmarajan, K., Manhapra, A., Li, S.-X., Negahban, S. N., & Krumholz, H. M. (2016) · Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.116.003039 · Cited by 401
Practical early prediction of students’ performance using machine learning and eXplainable AI
Jang, Y., Choi, S., Jung, H., & Kim, H. (2022) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11120-6 · Cited by 114
Uncertainty Assessment of Hyperspectral Image Classification: Deep Learning vs. Random Forest
Shadman Roodposhti, M., Aryal, J., Lucieer, A., & Bryan, B. A. (2019) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e21010078 · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Pal, M., & Foody, G. M.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2010-05
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2297-2307
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W2154506590
- Cited by
- 812
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 75.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.