Skip to main content

Table 2 LOOCV experiments on robustness of the feature weighting on the spiral with irrelevant noisy feature

From: Feature weight estimation for gene selection: a local hyperlinear learning approach

Spiral data

LHR

I-RELIEF

LOGO

Dimension

SVM

LDA

NB

KNN

HKNN

Aver.

SVM

LDA

NB

KNN

HKNN

Aver.

SVM

LDA

NB

KNN

HKNN

Aver.

0

84.0

53.3

50.0

87.0

87.0

72.3

84.0

51.7

50.0

87.0

87.0

72.0

51.0

51.5

52.0

84.3

84.3

64.6

1000

86.0

61.2

61.8

92.0

87.0

77.6

59.3

54.3

54.8

78.3

60.5

61.4

56.8

57.7

59.3

82.3

64.3

64.1

2000

90.0

69.0

67.0

92.0

89.0

81.4

56.8

57.0

55.8

72.3

57.8

59.9

57.3

57.8

60.3

88.5

83.8

69.5

3000

87.5

67.0

64.0

91.8

86.8

79.4

56.8

55.3

52.8

74.3

56.3

59.1

60.0

54.8

54.5

85.3

76.5

66.2

4000

88.5

64.0

66.3

92.3

88.5

79.9

55.5

58.8

57.3

71.3

55.3

59.6

59.0

60.5

61.8

86.5

79.5

69.5

5000

89.0

67.8

66.8

92.8

87.8

80.8

81.3

59.5

57.0

85.3

77.8

72.2

61.8

60.8

63.7

88.8

81.0

71.2

6000

88.8

66.3

67.5

92.0

88.3

80.5

64.3

57.3

59.5

74.0

61.0

63.2

54.8

54.5

57.0

87.5

82.5

67.3

7000

89.3

69.5

70.0

92.0

89.0

81.9

83.5

61.0

54.8

88.0

79.5

73.3

63.0

65.5

67.0

87.8

83.8

73.4

8000

86.8

65.0

66.8

93.8

88.3

80.1

0.0

56.5

59.3

69.8

55.0

48.1

66.5

67.5

69.3

89.3

82.5

75.0

9000

88.8

68.5

70.8

92.8

87.0

81.6

51.5

49.0

51.2

68.0

53.5

54.6

62.0

57.5

61.0

73.3

57.0

62.1

10000

88.8

68.5

70.8

92.8

87.0

81.6

51.5

49.0

51.2

68.0

53.5

54.6

57.0

57.5

56.0

86.5

81.8

67.8

  1. When using LOOCV criteria, the LHR outperforms both I-RELIEF and LOGO in terms of accuracy after classical classifier of SVM, LDA, NB, KNN and HKNN. The better averaged value after the two methods are highlighted in bold. With the increase of dimension of the irrelevant features, the performance of both LOGO and I-RELIEF are degraded while LHR keeps stable.