Cited by 1,282Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications

Particle swarm optimization for feature selection in classification: a multi-objective approach

Xue, Bing, Zhang, Mengjie, Browne, Will N.·2013·IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics

Abstract

Classification problems often have a large number of features in the data sets, but not all of them are useful for classification. Irrelevant and redundant features may even reduce the performance. Feature selection aims to choose a small number of relevant features to achieve similar or even better classification performance than using all features. It has two main conflicting objectives of maximizing the classification performance and minimizing the number of features. However, most existing feature selection algorithms treat the task as a single objective problem. This paper presents the first study on multi-objective particle swarm optimization (PSO) for feature selection. The task is to generate a Pareto front of nondominated solutions (feature subsets). We investigate two PSO-based multi-objective feature selection algorithms. The first algorithm introduces the idea of nondominated sorting into PSO to address feature selection problems. The second algorithm applies the ideas of crowding, mutation, and dominance to PSO to search for the Pareto front solutions. The two multi-objective algorithms are compared with two conventional feature selection methods, a single objective feature selection method, a two-stage feature selection algorithm, and three well-known evolutionary multi-objective algorithms on 12 benchmark data sets. The experimental results show that the two PSO-based multi-objective algorithms can automatically evolve a set of nondominated solutions. The first algorithm outperforms the two conventional methods, the single objective method, and the two-stage algorithm. It achieves comparable results with the existing three well-known multi-objective algorithms in most cases. The second algorithm achieves better results than the first algorithm and all other methods mentioned previously.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmcb.2012.2227469

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xue, B., Zhang, M., & Browne, W. N.
Affiliations
Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics
Published
2013-12
Volume
43
Issue
6
Pages
1656-1671
ISSN
  • 2168-2267 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-2275
OpenAlex
W2013885787
Cited by
1,282
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 87 · 2024: 96 · 2023: 130 · 2022: 126 · 2021: 156 · 2020: 139 · 2019: 144 · 2018: 123 · 2017: 84 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 10
FWCI
25.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Keywords
feature selection, particle swarm optimization, multi-objective optimization, classification, Pareto front, non-dominated sorting, crowding, genetic mutations, feature subsets, feature redundancy, evolutionary algorithms
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Decision Support Techniques, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Information Storage and Retrieval

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