Simulated Annealing - Advances, Applications and Hybridizations 2012
DOI: 10.5772/50176
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulated Annealing Evolution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Selection of the number of factors can influence the model results strongly, so care was taken to find a method for selecting the most appropriate number for our models. Methods tested include the root mean squared error of cross validation (RMSECV; Naes et al, 2002), selection of a local minimum within the RMSECV surface (Li et al, 2002), modified RMSECV (van der Voet, 1994), root mean squared error of calibration (RMSEC), root mean squared error of prediction (RMSEP), a custom bias/error inclusion metric from Takahama and coworkers (Takahama and Dillner, 2015), explained variance in the test set of standard functional group moles, and simulated annealing (SA; Ledesma et al, 2012). Ultimately, the number of PLS factors should be selected using the minimum RMSECV, so that the values were allowed to vary in each model version.…”
Section: Model Factor Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Selection of the number of factors can influence the model results strongly, so care was taken to find a method for selecting the most appropriate number for our models. Methods tested include the root mean squared error of cross validation (RMSECV; Naes et al, 2002), selection of a local minimum within the RMSECV surface (Li et al, 2002), modified RMSECV (van der Voet, 1994), root mean squared error of calibration (RMSEC), root mean squared error of prediction (RMSEP), a custom bias/error inclusion metric from Takahama and coworkers (Takahama and Dillner, 2015), explained variance in the test set of standard functional group moles, and simulated annealing (SA; Ledesma et al, 2012). Ultimately, the number of PLS factors should be selected using the minimum RMSECV, so that the values were allowed to vary in each model version.…”
Section: Model Factor Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%