Fusing image representations for classification using support vector machines

In order to improve classification accuracy different image representations are usually combined. This can be done by using two different fusing schemes. In feature level fusion schemes, image representations are combined before the classification process. In classifier fusion, the decisions taken separately based on individual representations are fused to make a decision. In this paper the main methods derived for both strategies are evaluated. Our experimental results show that classifier fusion performs better. Specifically Bayes belief integration is the best performing strategy for image classification task.Comment: Image and Vision Computing New Zealand, 2009. IVCNZ '09. 24th International Conference, Wellington : Nouvelle-Z\'elande (2009

Reliability analysis and micromechanics: A coupled approach for composite failure prediction

This work aims at associating two classical approaches for the design of composite materials: first, reliability methods that allow to account for the various uncertainties involved in the composite materials behaviour and lead to a rational estimation of their reliability level; on the other hand, micromechanics that derive macroscopic constitutive laws from micromechanical features. Such approach relies on the introduction of variabilities defined at the microscale and on the investigation of their consequences on the material macroscopic response through an homogenization scheme. Precisely, we propose here a systematic treatment of variability which involves a strong link between micro- and macroscales and provides a more exhaustive analysis of the influence of uncertainties. The paper intends to explain the main steps of such coupling and demonstrate its interests for material engineering, especially for constitutive modelling and composite materials optimization. An application case is developed throughout on the failure of unidirectional carbon fibre-reinforced composites with a comparative analysis between experimental data and simulation results

Evaluation of Performance Measures for Classifiers Comparison

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem, occuring each time one has to choose a classifier to solve a real-world problem. It is also a complex task with many important methodological decisions to make. Among those, one of the most crucial is the choice of an appropriate measure in order to properly assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. In this article, we focus on this specific task. We present the most popular measures and compare their behavior through discrimination plots. We then discuss their properties from a more theoretical perspective. It turns out several of them are equivalent for classifiers comparison purposes. Futhermore. they can also lead to interpretation problems. Among the numerous measures proposed over the years, it appears that the classical overall success rate and marginal rates are the more suitable for classifier comparison task

Accuracy Measures for the Comparison of Classifiers

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem. It is also a complex one, in the sense it requires to make several important methodological choices. Among them, in this work we focus on the measure used to assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. We present the most popular measures and discuss their properties. Despite the numerous measures proposed over the years, many of them turn out to be equivalent in this specific case, to have interpretation problems, or to be unsuitable for our purpose. Consequently, classic overall success rate or marginal rates should be preferred for this specific task.Comment: The 5th International Conference on Information Technology, amman : Jordanie (2011