| Literature DB >> 23573172 |
Kursat Zuhtuogullari1, Novruz Allahverdi, Nihat Arikan.
Abstract
The systems consisting high input spaces require high processing times and memory usage. Most of the attribute selection algorithms have the problems of input dimensions limits and information storage problems. These problems are eliminated by means of developed feature reduction software using new modified selection mechanism with middle region solution candidates adding. The hybrid system software is constructed for reducing the input attributes of the systems with large number of input variables. The designed software also supports the roulette wheel selection mechanism. Linear order crossover is used as the recombination operator. In the genetic algorithm based soft computing methods, locking to the local solutions is also a problem which is eliminated by using developed software. Faster and effective results are obtained in the test procedures. Twelve input variables of the urological system have been reduced to the reducts (reduced input attributes) with seven, six, and five elements. It can be seen from the obtained results that the developed software with modified selection has the advantages in the fields of memory allocation, execution time, classification accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity values when compared with the other reduction algorithms by using the urological test data.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23573172 PMCID: PMC3618912 DOI: 10.1155/2013/587564
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1General structure of the developed software.
Figure 2General structure of software interface (FRSGR).
Figure 3Artificial neural network and test part of the developed software.
Figure 4Another software developed for reducing the input attributes by using the decision relative discernibility approach.
Some of the transactions in the medical (urological) database.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 7 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 8 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 11 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 12 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 13 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 14 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 15 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
The terms used for the calculation of sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV.
| Diagnostic Test or Classification | Disease (Positive) | Disease Negative |
|---|---|---|
| Test Positive | True Positive (T. P.) | False Positive (F. P.) |
| Test Negative | False Negative (F. N.) | True Negative (T. N.) |
|
| ||
| The Column Total | (T. P.) + (F. N.) | (F. P.) + (T. N.) |
Average time interval and memory usage levels of tested system softwares.
| Tested System | Number of Inputs | Time (average) | Allocated Memory Peak Working Set (MB), (average res.) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Modified | 12 | 2–20 min. | 70–250 MB | ||
| 1 | FRSGR | Artificial | 12 | 3.5–33 min. | 65–300 MB |
| Roulette | 12 | 4–35 min. | 75–320 MB | ||
| Modified | 15 | 4–30 min. | 75–320 MB | ||
|
| |||||
| 12 | 70 min. | 380 MB | |||
| 2 | Decision Relative Discenibility | ||||
| 15 | Exceeds 4 Hours | Exceeds 860 MB and causes memory error (insufficient memory) | |||
|
| |||||
| 3 | Attribute dependency reduction without genetic search | 12 | Exceeds 2 Hours | Exceeds 899 MB and causes memory error | |
Some of the reducts found by the developed FRSGR.
| Element Number | The Reducts | Attribute Dependency Value |
|---|---|---|
| 7 |
| 1 |
|
| 1 | |
|
| ||
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
| 6 |
| 1 |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| 1 | |
|
| ||
|
| 0.975 | |
|
| 0.967 | |
| 6 |
| 0.975 |
|
| 0.983 | |
|
| 0.975 | |
|
| ||
| 5 |
| 1 |
Classification accuracies, sensitivities, specificities, PPV and NPV of FRSGR, decision relative discernibility, and Johnson reducer.
| Tested System Software | Average Classification Accuracy (%) | Average Sensitivity (%) | Average Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) FRSGR | 95 | 97 | 93 | 95 | 95 |
| (2) Decision Relative Discernibility | 80 | 82 | 78 | 84 | 74 |
| (3) Johnson Reducer (Rosetta) (Full and Object Related Discernibility) | 55 | 52 | 60 | 66 | 45 |