↓ Skip to main content

Optimal combination of feature selection and classification via local hyperplane based learning strategy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Optimal combination of feature selection and classification via local hyperplane based learning strategy
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12859-015-0629-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoping Cheng, Hongmin Cai, Yue Zhang, Bo Xu, Weifeng Su

Abstract

Classifying cancers by gene selection is among the most important and challenging procedures in biomedicine. A major challenge is to design an effective method that eliminates irrelevant, redundant, or noisy genes from the classification, while retaining all of the highly discriminative genes. We propose a gene selection method, called local hyperplane-based discriminant analysis (LHDA). LHDA adopts two central ideas. First, it uses a local approximation rather than global measurement; second, it embeds a recently reported classification model, K-Local Hyperplane Distance Nearest Neighbor(HKNN) classifier, into its discriminator. Through classification accuracy-based iterations, LHDA obtains the feature weight vector and finally extracts the optimal feature subset. The performance of the proposed method is evaluated in extensive experiments on synthetic and real microarray benchmark datasets. Eight classical feature selection methods, four classification models and two popular embedded learning schemes, including k-nearest neighbor (KNN), hyperplane k-nearest neighbor (HKNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest are employed for comparisons. The proposed method yielded comparable to or superior performances to seven state-of-the-art models. The nice performance demonstrate the superiority of combining feature weighting with model learning into an unified framework to achieve the two tasks simultaneously.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 36 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 9 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 13%
Engineering 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,441,654
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,194
of 7,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,768
of 262,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#67
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.