Cited by 225Machine Learning and Data ClassificationData Mining and Machine Learning ApplicationsText and Document Classification Technologies

A systematic comparison of supervised classifiers

Open access
Amancio, Diego Raphael, Comin, Cesar Henrique, Casanova, Dalcimar, Travieso, Gonzalo, Bruno, Odemir Martinez, Rodrigues, Francisco Aparecido, da Fontoura Costa, Luciano·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Pattern recognition has been employed in a myriad of industrial, commercial and academic applications. Many techniques have been devised to tackle such a diversity of applications. Despite the long tradition of pattern recognition research, there is no technique that yields the best classification in all scenarios. Therefore, as many techniques as possible should be considered in high accuracy applications. Typical related works either focus on the performance of a given algorithm or compare various classification methods. In many occasions, however, researchers who are not experts in the field of machine learning have to deal with practical classification tasks without an in-depth knowledge about the underlying parameters. Actually, the adequate choice of classifiers and parameters in such practical circumstances constitutes a long-standing problem and is one of the subjects of the current paper. We carried out a performance study of nine well-known classifiers implemented in the Weka framework and compared the influence of the parameter configurations on the accuracy. The default configuration of parameters in Weka was found to provide near optimal performance for most cases, not including methods such as the support vector machine (SVM). In addition, the k-nearest neighbor method frequently allowed the best accuracy. In certain conditions, it was possible to improve the quality of SVM by more than 20% with respect to their default parameter configuration.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0094137

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Commonly used machine learning algorithms differ in their attributes.

    “The commonly used ML algorithms have different attributes (Table 4) and therefore it is crucial to choose an appropriate algorithm for the multi-omics analysis.”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Amancio et al., 2014

  • Many reviews examine the strengths and weaknesses of different machine learning algorithms on single-omics and multi-omics datasets.

    “In the literature, many reviews cover the key strengths and weaknesses of different ML algorithms using single omics (Amancio et al., 2014;López Pineda et al., 2015;Sakr et al., 2017;Uddin et al., 2019) and multi-omics (Ma et al., 2016;Francescatto et al., 2018;J. Xu et al., 2019;Sathyanarayanan et al., 2020) datasets.”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Amancio et al., 2014

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [13]Smetanin YG (1995) Neural networks as systems for pattern recognition: a review. Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis 5: 254– 293.
  2. [25]Wu X, Kumar V, Quinlan JR, Ghosh J (2007) Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Springer-Verlag.
  3. [53]Ian H, Frank E (2005) Data mining: pratical machine learning tools and techiniques. Morgan Kaufmann.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amancio, D. R., Comin, C. H., Casanova, D., Travieso, G., Bruno, O. M., Rodrigues, F. A., & da Fontoura Costa, L.
Affiliations
Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
Corresponding author
Amancio, Diego Raphael
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-04-24
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
e94137
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1997113291
Cited by
225
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 2
FWCI
16.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scientific Electronic Library Online (São Paulo Research Foundation, Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (2014/, 2011/22639-8, 11/50761-2, 2010/00927-9)
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (2011/50761-2, 573583/2008-0, 305940/2010-4, 2010-3)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining and Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
Keywords
supervised classification, classifier comparison, WEKA, parameter setting, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbors, classification accuracy, pattern recognition
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, ROC Curve, Support Vector Machine

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