The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dimension Reduction: A Guided Tour
Abstract
We give a tutorial overview of several foundational methods for dimension reduction. We divide the methods into projective methods and methods that model the manifold on which the data lies. For projective methods, we review projection pursuit, principal component analysis (PCA), kernel PCA, probabilistic PCA, canonical correlation analysis (CCA), kernel CCA, Fisher discriminant analysis, oriented PCA, and several techniques for sufficient dimension reduction. For the manifold methods, we review multidimensional scaling (MDS), landmark MDS, Isomap, locally linear embedding, Laplacian eigenmaps, and spectral clustering. Although this monograph focuses on foundations, we also provide pointers to some more modern techniques. We also describe the correlation dimension as one method for estimating the intrinsic dimension, and we point out that the notion of dimension can be a scale-dependent quantity. The Nyström method, which links several of the manifold algorithms, is also reviewed. We use a publicly available data set to illustrate some of the methods. The goal is to provide a self-contained overview of key concepts underlying many of these algorithms, and to give pointers for further reading.
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
Boyd, S., & Vandenberghe, L. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804441 · Cited by 56,601
Golub, G. (2012) · doi:10.56021/9781421407944 · Cited by 34,505
A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets
Hinton, G. E., Osindero, S., & Teh, Y.-W. (2006) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2006.18.7.1527 · Cited by 16,336
Training Products of Experts by Minimizing Contrastive Divergence
Hinton, G. E. (2002) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/089976602760128018 · Cited by 4,879
A learning algorithm for Boltzmann machines
Ackley, D. H., Hinton, G. E., & Sejnowski, T. J. (1985) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0901_7 · Cited by 3,402
The information bottleneck method
Tishby, N., Pereira, F. C., & Bialek, W. (2000) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.physics/0004057 · Cited by 2,626 · cited 1×
“The Information Bottleneck method [90] may also be viewed as a dimension reduction method.”
MethodProbability and Random Processes.
Grimmett, G. R., & Stirzaker, D. R. (2001) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198572237.001.0001 · Cited by 1,850
On a connection between kernel PCA and metric multidimensional scaling
Williams, C. K. I. (2002) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1012485807823 · Cited by 206
Cited by
Online learning: A comprehensive survey
Hoi, S. C. H., Sahoo, D., Lu, J., & Zhao, P. (2021) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2021.04.112 · Cited by 746
Optimization with Sparsity-Inducing Penalties
Bach, F., Jenatton, R., Mairal, J., & Obozinski, G. (2025) · Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning · doi:10.1561/2200000015 · Cited by 730
Optimization with Sparsity-Inducing Penalties
Bach, F. (2011) · now publishers, Inc. eBooks · doi:10.1561/9781601985118 · Cited by 608
Mathematics for Machine Learning
Deisenroth, M. P., Faisal, A. A., & Ong, C. S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108679930 · Cited by 573
Applications of machine learning in animal behaviour studies
Valletta, J. J., Torney, C., Kings, M., Thornton, A., & Madden, J. (2017) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.12.005 · Cited by 505
“Reducing the dimensionality of a problem is achieved by mapping the original data to a new feature set, feature extraction (Burges, 2009; van Der Maaten, Postma, & van Den Herik, 2009; Lee & Verleysen, 2007), and/or selecting a subset of attributes, feature selection (Liu & Motoda, 2008).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Burges, C. J. C.
- Venue
- Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 275-364
- ISSN
- 1935-8237 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-8245
- OpenAlex
- W2117920736
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 9.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.