Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 54
Abstract— Recently, hybrid Particle Swarm Optimisation/Ant Colony Optimisation (PSO/ACO) has proposed for the discovery
of classification rules. This algorithm with using advantages of both algorithms, which include experience of each particles and
their neighbours –from PSO- and using pheromone and update them –from ACO- has good result for nominal data set, but has
not enough speed. In addition, PSO/ACO2 algorithm can directly cope with nominal attributes, without converting nominal
values into numbers in a pre-processing phase. In this paper, we use two algorithms of feature selection to speed it up.
Index Terms— Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), Feature Selection (FS), Hybrid PSO/ACO2, Particle Swarm Optimization
(PSO).
—————————— ——————————
1 INTRODUCTION
5 RESULT
To update pheromone of current particle for next ite-
ration used position of best neighbor and best previous This section includes the results of the implementation on
position of this particle. If quality of current particle is several classification problems from UCI repository has
better than best previous position, should be replaced. been done. We use MATLAB 7.6.0 for implementation. In
In addition, in [20] has said that if topology of neighbors addition, for CFC and FCBF algorithm, we used the pack-
is Von-Neumann, result will be better. Algorithm 2 age that it was ready in [25]. A summary of all datasets
shows the PSO/ACO2 algorithm. has been shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF DATASETS
Algorithm 2 The Hybrid PSO/ACO2 Algorithm
Dataset Instances Attributes Classes
Initialize population
REPEAT for MaxIterations Lymph 148 18 4
FOR every particle x Hayes-roth 160 5 3
/* Rule Creation */
Set Rule Rx = “IF THEN C” Breast-cancer 286 9 2
FOR ever dimension d in x Vote 435 16 2
Use roulette selection to choose whether the state Balance 625 4 3
should be set to off or on. If it is on then the cor-
Kr-vs-kp 3196 36 2
responding attribute-value pair set in the initiali-
zation will be added to R; otherwise (i.e., if off is Splice 3190 61 3
selected) nothing will be added. Mushroom 8124 22 2
ENDFOR
Calculate Quality Qx of Rx
/* Set the past best position */ In Table 2 and Table 3 respectively, the result of using
P = x’s best previous position CFC and FCBF algorithms has been shown as pre-
QP = P’s quality processing phase. In many cases, with keeping accuracy,
IF Qx > QP the average rule size (ARS) and average rule length (ARL)
Qp = Qx is reduced. However, in some cases, we have also
P=x
increased accuracy.
ENDIF
ENDFOR Table 4 and Table 5 compare the speed of algorithm in
FOR every particle x both cases: with and without FS. Although in some cases
P = x’s best previous position the speed up is impressive, but when number of
N = the best position ever held by a neighbor of x ac- attributes is high, we have not choice except reducing
cording to N’s quality QN features.
FOR every dimension d in x
/* Pheromone updating procedure */ 4 CONCLUSION
IF Pd = Nd THEN
pheromone_entry for Pd is increased by 0.25 In this paper, we speed up hybrid PSO/ACO2 with
ELSEIF Pd = off AND seeding term for xd ≠ Nd feature selection. The result shows after select relevant
THEN features, we have more simple rules addition to speed
pheromone_entry for the off state is increased up of the algorithm. However, in datasets with large
by 0.25 number of feature or datasets have large noise, the use
ELSE
of feature selection are suggested.
pheromone_entry for Pd is decreased by 0.25
For future work, we consider to use other methods
ENDIF
Normalize pheromone_entries and algorithms to speed up PSO/ACO2 algorithm.
ENDFOR
ENDFOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT
ENDREPEAT The authors would like to thank N. Holden for his useful
RETURN best rule discovered comments and suggestions.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 1, JANUARY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 58
TABLE 2: COMPARE ACCURACY, SIZE AND LENGTH OF RULES USING CFC ALGORITHM AND WITHOUT IT
TABLE 3: COMPARE ACCURACY, SIZE AND LENGTH OF RULES USING FCBF ALGORITHM AND WITHOUT IT
TABLE 4: COMPARE NUMBER OF FEATURES AND SPEED UP HYBRID ALGORITHM USING CFC ALGORITHM AND WITHOUT IT
Dataset no. of Attributes (before CFC) no. of Attributes (after CFC) Speed up (before/after)
Lymph 18 10 1
Hayes-roth 5 3 1.2
Breast-cancer 9 4 3.2
Vote 16 4 2.2
Balance 4 1 8.8
Kr-vs-kp 36 7 10.1
Splice 61 31 11
Mushroom 22 4 2.4
TABLE 5: COMPARE NUMBER OF FEATURES AND SPEED UP HYBRID ALGORITHM USING FCBF ALGORITHM AND WITHOUT IT
Dataset no. of Attributes (before FCBF) no. of Attributes (after FCBF) Speed up (before/after)
Lymph 18 7 1
Hayes-roth 5 3 1.2
Breast-cancer 9 3 3.8
Vote 16 4 2.2
Balance 4 4 0.9
Kr-vs-kp 36 7 10.1
Splice 61 31 11
Mushroom 22 4 2.4