Skip to main content
Log in

Combining local and global learners in the pairwise multiclass classification

  • Theoretical Advances
  • Published:
Pattern Analysis and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pairwise classification is a well-known class binarization technique that converts a multiclass problem into a number of two-class problems, one problem for each pair of classes. However, in the pairwise technique, nuisance votes of many irrelevant classifiers may result in a wrong class prediction. To overcome this problem, a simple, but efficient method is proposed and evaluated in this paper. The proposed method is based on excluding some classes and focusing on the most probable classes in the neighborhood space, named Local Crossing Off (LCO). This procedure is performed by employing a modified version of standard K-nearest neighbor and large margin nearest neighbor algorithms. The LCO method takes advantage of nearest neighbor classification algorithm because of its local learning behavior as well as the global behavior of powerful binary classifiers to discriminate between two classes. Combining these two properties in the proposed LCO technique will avoid the weaknesses of each method and will increase the efficiency of the whole classification system. On several benchmark datasets of varying size and difficulty, we found that the LCO approach leads to significant improvements using different base learners. The experimental results show that the proposed technique not only achieves better classification accuracy in comparison to other standard approaches, but also is computationally more efficient for tackling classification problems which have a relatively large number of target classes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. From an ensemble classification point of view, the ECOC approach can be categorized in ensemble methods.

References

  1. Allwein EL, Schapire RE, Singer Y (2001) Reducing multiclass to binary: a unifying approach for margin classifiers. J Mach Learn Res 1:113–141

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Anand R, Mehrotra K, Mohan CK, Ranka S (1995) Efficient classification for multiclass problems using modular neural networks. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 6(1):117–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Blake C, Merz C (1998) Uci repository of machine learning databases, department of information and computer sciences. University of california, Irvine

  4. Boiman O, Shechtman E, Irani M (2008) In defense of nearest-neighbor based image classification. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE, pp 1–8

  5. Chang CC, Lin CJ (2011) Libsvm: a library for support vector machines. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 2(3):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Clark P, Boswell R (1991) Rule induction with cn2: Some recent improvements. In: Kodratoff Y (ed) Machine Learning-EWSL-91, vol 482. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 151–163

  7. Demsar J (2006) Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. J Mach Learn Res 7:1–30

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Dietterich T, Bakiri G (1995) Solving multiclass learning problems via error-correcting output codes. J Artif Intell Res 2:263–286

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Escalera S, Pujol O, Radeva P (2010) On the decoding process in ternary error-correcting output codes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 32(1):120–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Escalera S, Pujol O, Radeva P (2010) Re-coding ecocs without re-training. Pattern Recognit Lett 31:555–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fei B, Liu J (2006) Binary tree of svm: a new fast multiclass training and cassification algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 17:696–704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fnrnkranz J (2002) Round robin classification. J Mach Learn Res 2:721–747

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Garcfa-Pedrajas N, Ortiz-Boyer D (2011) An empirical study of binary classifier fusion methods for multiclass classification. Inform Fusion 12(2):111–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Garcia-Pedrajas N, Ortiz-Boyer D (2006) Improving multiclass pattern recognition by the combination of two strategies. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 28(6):1001–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hastie T, Tibshirani R (1998) Classification by pairwise coupling. Ann Stat 26(2):451–471

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Hnllermeier E, Vanderlooy S (2010) Combining predictions in pairwise classification: an optimal adaptive voting strategy and its relation to weighted voting. Pattern Recognit 43(1):128–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hsu CW, Lin CJ (2002) A comparison of methods for multiclass support vector machines. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 13(2):415–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Iman R, Davenport J (1980) Approximations of the critical regions of the friedman statistic. Commun Stat 6:571–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Knerr S, Personnaz L, Dreyfus G (1990) Single-layer learning revisited: a stepwise procedure for building and training a neural network. In: Fogelman J (ed) Neurocomputing: algorithms, architectures and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ko J, Byun H (2003) Binary classifier fusion based on the basic decomposition methods. In: Windeatt T, Roli F (eds) Multiple Classifier Systems, vol 2709., Lecture Notes in Computer ScienceSpringer, Berlin / Heidelberg, pp 159–159

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Kumar S, Ghosh J, Crawford MM (2002) Hierarchical fusion of multiple classifiers for hyperspectral data analysis. Pattern Anal Appl 5(2):210–220

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Nemenyi P (1963) Distribution-free multiple comparisons. Ph.D. thesis

  23. Park SH, Fnrnkranz J (2007) Efficient pairwise classification. In: Kok J, Koronacki J, Mantaras R, Matwin S, Mladenic D, Skowron A (eds) Machine Learning: ECML 2007, vol 4701., Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 658–665

  24. Platt J, Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J (2000) Large margin DAGs for multiclass classification. In: Solla S, Leen T, Mnller KR (eds) Proceedings of Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’99. MIT Press, London, pp 547–553

  25. Pujol O, Radeva P, Vitria J (2006) Discriminant ecoc: a heuristic method for application dependent design of error correcting output codes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 28(6):1007–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rifkin R, Klautau A (2004) In defense of one-vs-all classification. J Mach Learn Res 5:101–141

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Vapnik V (1998) Statistical Learning Theory. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Weinberger KQ, Saul LK (2009) Distance metric learning for large margin nearest neighbor classification. J Mach Learn Res 10:207–244

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Windeatt T, Ardeshir G (2001) An empirical comparison of pruning methods for ensemble classifiers

  30. Wu T, Lin C, Weng R (2004) Probability estimates for multi-class classification by pairwise coupling. J Mach Learn Res 5:975–1005

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Ali Bagheri .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bagheri , M.A., Gao, Q. & Escalera, S. Combining local and global learners in the pairwise multiclass classification. Pattern Anal Applic 18, 845–860 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10044-014-0374-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10044-014-0374-x

Keywords

Navigation