2002
DOI: 10.1007/s100440200015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combining Discriminant Models with New Multi-Class SVMs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
63
0
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
1
63
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The multiclass SVM gave lower accuracy rates than the common methods. However, multi-class SVMs gave promising results and outperformed other combinatory methods in the prediction of protein secondary structures [15].…”
Section: Multi-class Svmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The multiclass SVM gave lower accuracy rates than the common methods. However, multi-class SVMs gave promising results and outperformed other combinatory methods in the prediction of protein secondary structures [15].…”
Section: Multi-class Svmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Best generalization performance for KNN algorithm is given for K equal to 3. For SVMs, the multiclass implementation of [27] was used. Generalization performances were estimated using again a ten-fold cross validation approach.…”
Section: A Classification Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although they operate on the same class of functions and their learning problems all extend in a straightforward way the one of bi-class SVMs (precisely the 1-norm and the 2-norm ones), they exhibit distinct properties. In recent years, several comparative studies between M-SVMs and decomposition methods have been published (see for instance Guermeur, 2002;Hsu and Lin, 2002). In short, they establish that in practice, no model is uniformly superior or inferior to the others with respect to the standard criteria: prediction accuracy, sparsity, computational complexity, etc.…”
Section: During the Last Decade Many M-svms And Decomposition Methodmentioning
confidence: 99%