M. Vineela, V.Rama Krishna


This study counseled a stalk Q-statistic that fact evaluates the show of your FS description. Q-statistic accounts for the two the steadiness of decided on promotes subdivision and likewise the hunch rigor. The study advised Booster to recover the appearance of one's alive FS maxim. However, because of an FS prescription in line amidst the supposition rigor might be ticklish uponinside the variations plus inside the teaching set, in particular in sharp structural goods. This study proposes a brand spanking new assessment average Q-statistic who comes amidst the stability with the decided on mark subdivision you will also against the guesswork sureness. Then, we propose the Booster of one's FS maxim which reinforces the will for the Q-statistic with the prescription practiced. A consequential inherent burden plus leading choice is, nevertheless, a veer upon within the compromise on the introductory emphasize may end up in a thoroughly the different promote batch and thus the steadiness in the decided on set of emphasizes may be if truth be told low despite the fact that the election may fail steep fidelity. This card proposes Q-statistic to pass judgment on the drama of your FS equation using a classifier. This might be a combination way of aligning the hypothesis particularity with the classifier and likewise the steadiness of you’re decided on emphasizes. The MI assessment plus probability picture comes to tightness assessment of sharp geographical testimony. Although so much researches have already been succeeded on multivariate quantity consideration, sharp geometric quantity reckoning including narrow inspect compass are choke a powerful weigh. Then your study proposes Booster on deciding on advertise group on the habituated FS maxim.


Booster; Feature Selection; Q-Statistic; FS Algorithm; High Dimensional Data;


G. Brown, A. Pocock, M. J. Zhao, and M. Lujan, “Conditional likelihood maximization: A unifying framework for information theoretic feature selection,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 27–66, 2012.

HyunJi Kim, Byong Su Choi, and Moon Yul Huh, “Booster in High DimensionalData Classification”,ieee transactions on knowledge and data engineering, vol. 28, no. 1, january 2016.

H. Liu, J. Li, and L.Wong, “A comparative study on feature selection and classification methods using gene expression profiles and proteomic patterns,” Genome Informatics Series, vol. 13, pp. 51–60, 2002.

T. R. Golub, D. K. Slonim, P. Tamayo, C. Huard, M. Gaasenbeek, J. P. Mesirov, H. Coller, M. L. Loh, J. R. Downing, M. A. Caligiuri, C. D. Bloomfield, and E. S. Lander, “Molecular classification of cancer: Class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring,” Am. Assoc. Advancement Sci., vol. 286, no. 5439, pp. 531–537, 1999.

S. A. Sajan, J. L. Rubenstein, M. E. Warchol, and M. Lovett, “Identification of direct downstream targets of Dlx5 during early inner ear development,” Human Molecular Genetics, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 1262–1273, 2011.

Q. Hu, L. Zhang, D. Zhang, W. Pan, S. An, and W. Pedrycz, “Measuring relevance between discrete and continuous features based on neighborhood mutual information,” Expert Syst. With Appl., vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 10737–10750, 2011.

J. Stefanowski, “An experimental study of methods combining multiple classifiers-diversified both by feature selection and bootstrap sampling,” Issues Representation Process. Uncertain Imprecise Inf., Akademicka Oficyna Wydawnicza, Warszawa, pp. 337–354, 2005.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright © 2012 - 2023, All rights reserved.|

Creative Commons License
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.Based on a work at IJITR , Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at