4.6 Article

Feature selection using swarm-based relative reduct technique for fetal heart rate

期刊

NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS
卷 25, 期 3-4, 页码 793-806

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-014-1552-x

关键词

Unsupervised; PSO; Feature selection; Relative reduct; Fetal heart rate; Cardiotocogram

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fetal heart rate helps in diagnosing the well-being and also the distress of fetal. Cardiotocograph (CTG) monitors the fetal heart activity to estimate the fetal tachogram based on the evaluation of ultrasound pulses reflected from the fetal heart. It consists in a simultaneous recording and analysis of fetal heart rate signal, uterine contraction activity and fetal movements. Generally CTG comprises more number of features. Feature selection also called as attribute selection is a process of selecting a subset of highly relevant features which is responsible for future analysis. In general, medical datasets require more number of features to predict an activity. This paper aims at identifying the relevant and ignores the redundant features, consequently reducing the number of features to assess the fetal heart rate. The features are selected by using unsupervised particle swarm optimization (PSO)-based relative reduct (US-PSO-RR) and compared with unsupervised relative reduct and principal component analysis. The proposed method is then tested by applying various classification algorithms such as single decision tree, multilayer perceptron neural network, probabilistic neural network and random forest for maximum number of classes and clustering accuracies like root mean square error, mean absolute error, Davies-Bouldin index and Xie-Beni index for minimum number of classes. Empirical results show that the US-PSO-RR feature selection technique outperforms the existing methods by producing sensitivity of 72.72 %, specificity of 97.66 %, F-measure of 74.19 % which is remarkable, and clustering results demonstrate error rate produced by US-PSO-RR is less as well.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据