↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

A Systematic Comparison of Supervised Classifiers

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
254 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A Systematic Comparison of Supervised Classifiers
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0094137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diego Raphael Amancio, Cesar Henrique Comin, Dalcimar Casanova, Gonzalo Travieso, Odemir Martinez Bruno, Francisco Aparecido Rodrigues, Luciano da Fontoura Costa

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 252 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 21%
Student > Bachelor 26 10%
Researcher 23 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 4%
Other 50 20%
Unknown 37 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 95 37%
Engineering 42 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 3%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 52 20%