arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2102.07113cs.LGcs.AIcs.CC
收藏

多标号分类方法的综合比较研究

Comprehensive Comparative Study of Multi-Label Classification Methods

Technical University Berlin(柏林工业大学);Jožef Stefan Institute(约瑟夫·斯特凡研究所);Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School(约瑟夫·斯特凡国际研究生院);University of Ljubljana(卢布尔雅那大学);Faculty of Public Administration, University of Ljubljana(卢布尔雅那大学公共管理学院);Bias Variance Labs, d.o.o.(Bias Variance Labs有限责任公司)

Jasmin Bogatinovski, Ljupčo Todorovski, Sašo Džeroski, Dragi Kocev

摘要:

多标签分类(MLC)最近受到机器学习社区越来越多的关注。一些研究提供了MLC的方法和数据集的审查,一些提供了MLC方法的经验比较。然而,它们在所考虑的方法和数据集的数量上是有限的。这项工作提供了一个全面的实证研究,广泛的MLC方法对来自各个领域的大量数据集。更具体地说,我们的研究使用20个评估指标在42个基准数据集上评估了26种方法。所采用的评价方法坚持设计和执行大规模,时间预算的实验研究的最高文献标准。首先,根据社区的使用情况选择方法,确保方法在MLC方法分类和不同基础学习器中的表示。其次,数据集涵盖了广泛的复杂性和应用领域。所选择的评估措施评估的预测性能和效率的方法。分析结果表明,RFPCT、RFDTBR、ECCJ 48、EBRJ 48和AdaBoostMH是性能指标范围内的最佳性能方法。无论何时引入一种新方法,都应将其与根据不同评价标准确定的MLC方法的不同子集进行比较。

英文摘要:

Multi-label classification (MLC) has recently received increasing interest from the machine learning community. Several studies provide reviews of methods and datasets for MLC and a few provide empirical comparisons of MLC methods. However, they are limited in the number of methods and datasets considered. This work provides a comprehensive empirical study of a wide range of MLC methods on a plethora of datasets from various domains. More specifically, our study evaluates 26 methods on 42 benchmark datasets using 20 evaluation measures. The adopted evaluation methodology adheres to the highest literature standards for designing and executing large scale, time-budgeted experimental studies. First, the methods are selected based on their usage by the community, assuring representation of methods across the MLC taxonomy of methods and different base learners. Second, the datasets cover a wide range of complexity and domains of application. The selected evaluation measures assess the predictive performance and the efficiency of the methods. The results of the analysis identify RFPCT, RFDTBR, ECCJ48, EBRJ48 and AdaBoostMH as best performing methods across the spectrum of performance measures. Whenever a new method is introduced, it should be compared to different subsets of MLC methods, determined on the basis of the different evaluation criteria.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑