Identifying hidden contexts

In this study we investigate how to identify hidden contexts from the data in classification tasks. Contexts are artifacts in the data, which do not predict the class label directly. For instance, in speech recognition task speakers might have different accents, which do not directly discriminate between the spoken words. Identifying hidden contexts is considered as data preprocessing task, which can help to build more accurate classifiers, tailored for particular contexts and give an insight into the data structure. We present three techniques to identify hidden contexts, which hide class label information from the input data and partition it using clustering techniques. We form a collection of performance measures to ensure that the resulting contexts are valid. We evaluate the performance of the proposed techniques on thirty real datasets. We present a case study illustrating how the identified contexts can be used to build specialized more accurate classifiers

Multi-View Face Recognition From Single RGBD Models of the Faces

This work takes important steps towards solving the following problem of current interest: Assuming that each individual in a population can be modeled by a single frontal RGBD face image, is it possible to carry out face recognition for such a population using multiple 2D images captured from arbitrary viewpoints? Although the general problem as stated above is extremely challenging, it encompasses subproblems that can be addressed today. The subproblems addressed in this work relate to: (1) Generating a large set of viewpoint dependent face images from a single RGBD frontal image for each individual; (2) using hierarchical approaches based on view-partitioned subspaces to represent the training data; and (3) based on these hierarchical approaches, using a weighted voting algorithm to integrate the evidence collected from multiple images of the same face as recorded from different viewpoints. We evaluate our methods on three datasets: a dataset of 10 people that we created and two publicly available datasets which include a total of 48 people. In addition to providing important insights into the nature of this problem, our results show that we are able to successfully recognize faces with accuracies of 95% or higher, outperforming existing state-of-the-art face recognition approaches based on deep convolutional neural networks

k-Nearest Neighbour Classifiers: 2nd Edition (with Python examples)

Perhaps the most straightforward classifier in the arsenal or machine learning techniques is the Nearest Neighbour Classifier -- classification is achieved by identifying the nearest neighbours to a query example and using those neighbours to determine the class of the query. This approach to classification is of particular importance because issues of poor run-time performance is not such a problem these days with the computational power that is available. This paper presents an overview of techniques for Nearest Neighbour classification focusing on; mechanisms for assessing similarity (distance), computational issues in identifying nearest neighbours and mechanisms for reducing the dimension of the data. This paper is the second edition of a paper previously published as a technical report. Sections on similarity measures for time-series, retrieval speed-up and intrinsic dimensionality have been added. An Appendix is included providing access to Python code for the key methods.Comment: 22 pages, 15 figures: An updated edition of an older tutorial on kN

An evaluation of the signature extension approach to large area crop inventories utilizing space image data

The author has identified the following significant results. Two examples of haze correction algorithms were tested: CROP-A and XSTAR. The CROP-A was tested in a unitemporal mode on data collected in 1973-74 over ten sample segments in Kansas. Because of the uniformly low level of haze present in these segments, no conclusion could be reached about CROP-A's ability to compensate for haze. It was noted, however, that in some cases CROP-A made serious errors which actually degraded classification performance. The haze correction algorithm XSTAR was tested in a multitemporal mode on 1975-76 LACIE sample segment data over 23 blind sites in Kansas and 18 sample segments in North Dakota, providing wide range of haze levels and other conditions for algorithm evaluation. It was found that this algorithm substantially improved signature extension classification accuracy when a sum-of-likelihoods classifier was used with an alien rejection threshold