iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23236-7_1
Techniques to Reject Atypical Patterns | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Techniques to Reject Atypical Patterns

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Optimization, Learning Algorithms and Applications (OL2A 2022)

Abstract

Supervised Classification algorithms are only trained to recognize and classify certain patterns, those contained in the training group. Therefore, these will by default, classify the unknown patterns incorrectly, causing unwanted results. This work proposes several solutions, to make the referred algorithms capable of detecting unknown patterns. The main approach for the development of models capable of recognizing these patterns, was the use of three different models of Autoencoders: Simple Autoencoder (SAE), Convolutional Autoencoder (CAE) and Variational Autoencoder (VAE), that are a specific type of Neural Networks. After carrying out several tests on each of the three models of Autoencoders, it was possible to determine which one performed best the task of detecting/rejecting atypical patterns. Afterwards, the performance of the best Autoencoder was compared to the performance of a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) in the execution of the referred task. The conclusion was that the VAE effectively detected atypical patterns better than the CNN. Some conventional Machine Learning techniques (Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR)) were also tested. The one that presented the best performance was the RF classifier, achieving an accuracy of 75% in the detection of atypical/typical patterns. Thus, regarding the classification balance between atypical and typical patterns, Machine Learning techniques were not enough to surpass the Deep Learning methods, where the best accuracy reached 88% for the VAE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Holzinger, A., Kieseberg, P., Weippl, E., Tjoa, A.M.: Current advances, trends and challenges of machine learning and knowledge extraction: from machine learning to explainable AI. In: Holzinger, A., Kieseberg, P., Tjoa, A.M., Weippl, E. (eds.) CD-MAKE 2018. LNCS, vol. 11015, pp. 1–8. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99740-7_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Abiodun, O.I., Jantan, A., Omolara, A.E., Dada, K.V., Mohamed, N.A., Arshad, H.: State-of-the-art in artificial neural network applications: a survey. Heliyon 4(11), e00938 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rezaei, M., Shahidi, M.: Zero-shot learning and its applications from autonomous vehicles to COVID-19 diagnosis: a review. Intell.-Based Med. 3–4, 100005 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ibmed.2020.100005

  4. Lampert, C.H., Nickisch, H., Harmeling, S.: Attribute-based classification for zero-shot visual object categorization. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 36(3), 453–465 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Larochelle, H., Erhan, D., Bengio, Y.: Zero-data learning of new tasks. In: Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume 2, ser. AAAI 2008, pp. 646–651. AAAI Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rohrbach, M., Stark, M., Schiele, B.: Evaluating knowledge transfer and zero-shot learning in a large-scale setting. In: CVPR 2011, pp. 1641–1648 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Yu, X., Aloimonos, Y.: Attribute-based transfer learning for object categorization with zero/one training example. In: Daniilidis, K., Maragos, P., Paragios, N. (eds.) ECCV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6315, pp. 127–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15555-0_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Cordella, L., De Stefano, C., Tortorella, F., Vento, M.: A method for improving classification reliability of multilayer perceptrons. IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 6(5), 1140–1147 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. De Stefano, C., Sansone, C., Vento, M.: To reject or not to reject: that is the question-an answer in case of neural classifiers. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C (Appl. Rev.) 30(1), 84–94 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Geifman, Y., El-Yaniv, R.: Selective classification for deep neural networks (2017). https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08500

  11. Baldi, P.: Autoencoders, unsupervised learning, and deep architectures. In: Guyon, I., Dror, G., Lemaire, V., Taylor, G., Silver, D. (eds.) Proceedings of ICML Workshop on Unsupervised and Transfer Learning, ser. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, vol. 27, Bellevue, Washington, USA: PMLR, 02 Jul 2012, pp. 37–49. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v27/baldi12a.html

  12. An, J., Cho, S.: Variational autoencoder based anomaly detection using reconstruction probability. Spec. Lect. IE 2(1), 1–18 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bhandare, A., Bhide, M., Gokhale, P., Chandavarkar, R.: Applications of convolutional neural networks. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 7(5), 2206–2215 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cheng, W., Hüllermeier, E.: Combining instance-based learning and logistic regression for multilabel classification. Mach. Learn. 76(2), 211–225 (2009)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Wijaya, A., Bisri, A.: Hybrid decision tree and logistic regression classifier for email spam detection. In: 2016 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering (ICITEE), pp. 1–4 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sahin, Y., Duman, E.: Detecting credit card fraud by ann and logistic regression. In: International Symposium on Innovations in Intelligent Systems and Applications 2011, pp. 315–319 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. H.-L. Hwa, et al.: Prediction of breast cancer and lymph node metastatic status with tumour markers using logistic regression models. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 14(2), 275–280 (2008). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00849.x

  18. Bisong, E.: Logistic regression. In: Bisong, E. (ed.) Building Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models on Google Cloud Platform, pp. 243–250. Apress, Berkeley (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-4470-8_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Cervantes, J., Garcia-Lamont, F., Rodríguez-Mazahua, L., Lopez, A.: A comprehensive survey on support vector machine classification: applications, challenges and trends. Neurocomputing 408, 189–215 (2020). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925231220307153

  20. Wang, Z., Xue, X.: Multi-class support vector machine. In: Ma, Y., Guo, G. (eds.) Support Vector Machines Applications, pp. 23–48. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02300-7_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Vaibhaw, Sarraf, J., Pattnaik, P.: Brain-computer interfaces and their applications. In: Balas, V.E., Solanki, V.K., Kumar, R. (eds.) An Industrial IoT Approach for Pharmaceutical Industry Growth, pp. 31–54. Academic Press (2020). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128213261000024

  22. Belgiu, M., Drăguţ, L.: Random forest in remote sensing: a review of applications and future directions. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote. Sens. 114, 24–31 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Caie, P.D., Dimitriou, N., Arandjelović, O.: Artificial intelligence and deep learning in pathology. Elsevier 114, 149–173 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Freund, Y., Schapire, R.E.: A short introduction to boosting. J. Jpn. Soc. Artif. Intell. 14, 771–780 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kaya, A., Keceli, A.S., Catal, C., Tekinerdogan, B.: Model analytics for defect prediction based on design-level metrics and sampling techniques. In: Model Management and Analytics for Large Scale Systems, pp. 125–139 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  26. LeCun, Y.: The MNIST database of handwritten digits (1998). http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/mnist/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Júlio Castro Lopes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Lopes, J.C., Rodrigues, P.J.S. (2022). Techniques to Reject Atypical Patterns. In: Pereira, A.I., Košir, A., Fernandes, F.P., Pacheco, M.F., Teixeira, J.P., Lopes, R.P. (eds) Optimization, Learning Algorithms and Applications. OL2A 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1754. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23236-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23236-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-23235-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-23236-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics