single-jc.php

JACIII Vol.13 No.3 pp. 338-346
doi: 10.20965/jaciii.2009.p0338
(2009)

Paper:

HACO2 Method for Evolving Hyperbox Classifiers with Ant Colony Optimization

Guilherme N. Ramos, Fangyan Dong, and Kaoru Hirota

Department of Computational Intelligence and Systems Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, G3-49, 4259 Nagatsuta, Midori-ku, Yokohama-city 226-8502, Japan

Received:
November 13, 2008
Accepted:
February 19, 2009
Published:
May 20, 2009
Keywords:
classification, ant colony optimization, hyperboxes, pattern recognition, software quality
Abstract

A method, called HACO2 (Hyperbox classifier with Ant Colony Optimization – type 2), is proposed for evolving a hyperbox classifier using the ant colony meta-heuristic. It reshapes the hyperboxes in a near-optimal way to better fit the data, improving the accuracy and possibly indicating its most discriminative features. HACO2 is validated using artificial 2D data showing over 90% accuracy. It is also applied to the benchmark iris data set (4 features), providing results with over 93% accuracy, and to the MIS data set (11 features), with almost 85% accuracy. For these sets, the two most discriminative features obtained from the method are used in simplified classifiers which result in accuracies of 100% for the iris and 83% for the MIS data sets. Further modifications (automatic parameter setting), extensions (initialization short comings) and applications are discussed.

Cite this article as:
Guilherme N. Ramos, Fangyan Dong, and Kaoru Hirota, “HACO2 Method for Evolving Hyperbox Classifiers with Ant Colony Optimization,” J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Inform., Vol.13, No.3, pp. 338-346, 2009.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] L. de C. T. Gomes, F. J. V. Zuben, and P. Moscato, “A proposal for direct-ordering gene expression data by self-organising maps,” Applied Soft Computing, Vol.5, No.1, pp. 11-21, Dec. 2004.
  2. [2] G. N. Ramos, Y. Hatakeyama, F. Dong, and K. Hirota, “Hyperbox Clustering with Ant Colony Optimization (HACO) Method And its Application to Medical Risk Profile Recognition,” Applied Soft Computing Vol.9, Issue 2, pp. 632-640, March 2009.
  3. [3] S. Yella, N. K. Gupta, and M. S. Dougherty, “Comparison of pattern recognitionnext term techniques for the classification of impact acoustic emissions,” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol.15, No.6, pp. 345-360, 2007.
  4. [4] A. Lumini and L. Nanni, “Two-class fingerprint matcher,” Pattern Recognition, Vol.39, No.4, pp. 714-716, April 2006.
  5. [5] R. O. Duda, P. E. Hart, and D. G. Stork, “Pattern Classification,” Wiley-Interscience, 2000.
  6. [6] P. Simpson, “Fuzzy min-max neural networks – Part 1: Classification,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol.3, pp. 776-786, 1992.
  7. [7] P. Simpson, “Fuzzy min-max neural networks – Part 2: Clustering,” IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Vol.1, p. 32, 1993.
  8. [8] M. Dorigo, V. Maniezzo, and A. Corloni, “Ant System,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part B, Vol.26, pp. 29-41, 1996.
  9. [9] M. Dorigo and T. Stützle, “Ant Colony Optimization,” The MIT Press, 2004.
  10. [10] M. Dorigo and G. Di Caro, “Ant Colony Optimization Meta-heuristic,” New Ideas in Optimization, McGraw-Hill, pp. 11-32, 1999.
  11. [11] L. M. Gambardella and M. Dorigo, “An Ant Colony System Hybridized with a New Local Search for the Sequential Ordering Problem,” INFORMS Journal on Computing, Vol.12, pp. 237-255, 2000.
  12. [12] J. L. Deneubourg et al., “The self-organizing exploratory pattern of the argentine ant,” Journal of Insect Behavior, Vol.3, pp. 159-168, 1990.
  13. [13] S. Goss et al., “Self-organized shortcuts in the Argentine ant,” Naturwissenschaften, Vol.76, pp. 579-581, 1989.
  14. [14] T. M. Mitchell, “Machine Learning,” Mcgraw-Hill, 1997.
  15. [15] W. Pedrycz and S. Giancarlo, “Genetic granular classifiers in modeling software quality,” Journal of Systems and Software, Vol.76, pp. 277-285, 2005.
  16. [16] W.J. Gutjahr, “A Graph-based Ant system and its convergence,” Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol.16, No.9, pp. 873-888, 2000.
  17. [17] G. Di Caro and M. Dorigo, “AntNet: Distributed Stigmergic Control for Communication Networks,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol.9, pp. 317-365, 1998.
  18. [18] M. Dorigo, M. Birattari, and T. Stützle, “Artificial Ants as a Computational Intelligence Technique,” IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 2006.
  19. [19] N. Monmarché, M. Slimane, and G. Venturini, “AntClass: discovery of clusters in numeric data by an hybridization of an ant colony with the Kmeans algorithm,” Technical Report No.213, E3I, Laboratorie d'Informatique, University of Tours, 1999.
  20. [20] J. C. Bezdek, “Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms,” Plenun, 1981.
  21. [21] G. N. Ramos, F. Dong, and K. Hirota, “Hyperbox Classifier with Ant Colony Optimization,” Proc. of SCIS & ISIS 2008, pp. 1714-1718, September 17-21, Nagoya, Japan, 2008.
  22. [22] R. R. Yager and L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy Sets, Neural Networks, and Soft Computing,” John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1994.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Mar. 05, 2021