1996
DOI: 10.1016/0168-9002(96)00733-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of the BP training algorithm and LVQ neural networks for e, μ, π identification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, principle component analysis (PCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), support vector machine (SVM), and other techniques, are used to reduce the dimensions but maintain the main characters of the data. These algorithms achieve a very high sensitivity and specificity; therefore, they substantiate the potential of Raman spectroscopy to distinguish cancer tissue from normal tissue [15][16][17]. Nevertheless, new algorithms are still needed to lessen the computation time and achieve more accurate diagnosis results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Therefore, principle component analysis (PCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), support vector machine (SVM), and other techniques, are used to reduce the dimensions but maintain the main characters of the data. These algorithms achieve a very high sensitivity and specificity; therefore, they substantiate the potential of Raman spectroscopy to distinguish cancer tissue from normal tissue [15][16][17]. Nevertheless, new algorithms are still needed to lessen the computation time and achieve more accurate diagnosis results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…A preliminary investigation was conducted to examine the relationship between the recognition window size and the in-control ARL. The in-control ARLs of the proposed CCPR models with recognition window sizes of 16,24,32,40,48, and 56 were 82, 167, 367, 784, 1750, and 4830, respectively. Each in-control ARL value here was obtained based on the average of 10000 independent simulation runs.…”
Section: An Lvq-based Ccpr Model With a Dynamic Training Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fault diagnosis and classification of signals are two typical applications of an LVQ network. For many tasks, the LVQ network can perform more accurate classifications than the BPN [6,10,35,40]. Moreover, LVQ networks are faster than BPNs during training [6,32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The faster approach is preferred in real-time applications where time is an important factor. In many practical applications, LVQ networks can also perform more accurate classifications than BPNs (Zhang et al 1996, Dieterle et al 2003. Hence, the present work adopted LVQ networks to develop a real-time CCPR system for autocorrelated processes.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%