A practical approach to feature selection
ML92 Proceedings of the ninth international workshop on Machine learning
Wrappers for feature subset selection
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on relevance
Gene functional classification from heterogeneous data
RECOMB '01 Proceedings of the fifth annual international conference on Computational biology
Use of the zero norm with linear models and kernel methods
The Journal of Machine Learning Research
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Pattern Recognition Letters
PairProSVM: Protein Subcellular Localization Based on Local Pairwise Profile Alignment and SVM
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (TCBB)
A solution to the curse of dimensionality problem in pairwise scoring techniques
ICONIP'06 Proceedings of the 13 international conference on Neural Information Processing - Volume Part I
A General Framework of Feature Selection for Text Categorization
MLDM '09 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition
Surgical phases detection from microscope videos by combining SVM and HMM
MCV'10 Proceedings of the 2010 international MICCAI conference on Medical computer vision: recognition techniques and applications in medical imaging
Hi-index | 0.01 |
It has been recently discovered that stacking the pairwise comparison scores between unknown patterns and a set of known patterns can result in feature vectors with desirable discriminative properties for classification. However, such technique can be hampered by the curse of dimensionality because the vectors size is equal to the training set size. To overcome this problem, this paper investigates various filter and wrapper feature selection techniques for reducing the feature dimension of pairwise scoring matrices and argues that these two types of selection techniques are complementary to each other. Two fusion strategies are then proposed to (1) combine the ranking criteria of filter and wrapper methods at algorithmic level and (2) merge the features selected by the filter and wrapper methods. Evaluations on a subcellular localization benchmark and a microarray dataset demonstrate that feature subsets selected by the fusion methods are either superior to or at least as good as those selected by the individual methods alone for a wide range of feature dimensions.