| Literature DB >> 25709937 |
Zahra Assarzadeh1, Ahmad Reza Naghsh-Nilchi2.
Abstract
In this paper, a chaotic particle swarm optimization with mutation-based classifier particle swarm optimization is proposed to classify patterns of different classes in the feature space. The introduced mutation operators and chaotic sequences allows us to overcome the problem of early convergence into a local minima associated with particle swarm optimization algorithms. That is, the mutation operator sharpens the convergence and it tunes the best possible solution. Furthermore, to remove the irrelevant data and reduce the dimensionality of medical datasets, a feature selection approach using binary version of the proposed particle swarm optimization is introduced. In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed classifier, mutation-based classifier particle swarm optimization, it is checked out with three sets of data classifications namely, Wisconsin diagnostic breast cancer, Wisconsin breast cancer and heart-statlog, with different feature vector dimensions. The proposed algorithm is compared with different classifier algorithms including k-nearest neighbor, as a conventional classifier, particle swarm-classifier, genetic algorithm, and Imperialist competitive algorithm-classifier, as more sophisticated ones. The performance of each classifier was evaluated by calculating the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and Matthews's correlation coefficient. The experimental results show that the mutation-based classifier particle swarm optimization unequivocally performs better than all the compared algorithms.Entities:
Keywords: Decision hyperplanes; medical database classification; particle swarm optimization; pattern recognition
Year: 2015 PMID: 25709937 PMCID: PMC4335141
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Signals Sens ISSN: 2228-7477
Figure 1MCPS-classifier pseudo-code
Results comparison for WDBC dataset
Results comparison for heart dataset
Figure 2The average rate of recognition (%) with respect to the number of function evaluation for (a) WDBC data classification, (b) WBC data classification and (c) Heart data classification
Results comparison for WBC dataset