Least Squares Support Vector Machine Classifiers
Neural Processing Letters
Proximal support vector machine classifiers
Proceedings of the seventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
SSVM: A Smooth Support Vector Machine for Classification
Computational Optimization and Applications
A Tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition
Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Minimum Redundancy Feature Selection from Microarray Gene Expression Data
CSB '03 Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Bioinformatics
Exact simplification of support vector solutions
The Journal of Machine Learning Research
Kernel Methods for Pattern Analysis
Kernel Methods for Pattern Analysis
A Direct Method for Building Sparse Kernel Learning Algorithms
The Journal of Machine Learning Research
Building Support Vector Machines with Reduced Classifier Complexity
The Journal of Machine Learning Research
A study on reduced support vector machines
IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Recently, building sparse SVMs becomes an active research topic due to its potential applications in large scale data mining tasks. One of the most popular approaches to building sparse SVMs is to select a small subset of training samples and employ them as the support vectors. In this paper, we explain that selecting the support vectors is equivalent to selecting a number of columns from the kernel matrix, and is equivalent to selecting a subset of features in the feature selection domain. Hence, we propose to use an effective feature selection algorithm, namely the Minimum Redundancy -- Maximum Relevance (MRMR) algorithm to solve the support vector selection problem. MRMR algorithm was then compared to two existing methods, namely back-fitting (BF) and pre-fitting (PF) algorithms. Preliminary results showed that MRMR generally outperformed BF algorithm while it was inferior to PF algorithm, in terms of generalization performance. However, the MRMR approach was extremely efficient and significantly faster than the two compared algorithms.