Memory-based classification algorithms such as radial basis functions orK-nearest neighbors typically rely on simple distances (Euclidean, dotproduct ...), which are not particularly meaningful on pattern vectors. More complex, better suited distance measures are often expensive and rather ad-hoc (elastic matching, deformable templates). We propose a new distance measure which (a) can be made locally invariant to any set of transformations of the input and (b) can be computed efficiently. We tested the method on large handwritten character databases provided by the Post Office and the NIST. Using invariances with respect to translation, rotation, scaling,shearing and line thickness, the method consistently outperformed all other systems tested on the same databases.

Feature selection and creation are two of the most important and difficult tasks in the field of pattern classification. Good features improve the performance of both conventional and neural network pattern classifiers. Exemplar selection is another task that can reduce the memory and computation requirements of a KNN classifier.

Feature selection and creation are two of the most important and difficult tasks in the field of pattern classification. Good features improve the performance of both conventional and neural network pattern classifiers. Exemplar selection is another task that can reduce the memory and computation requirements of a KNN classifier.

Santosh S. Venkatesh Electrical Engineering University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 If patterns are drawn from an n-dimensional feature space according to a probability distribution that obeys a weak smoothness criterion, we show that the probability that a random input pattern is misclassified by a nearest-neighbor classifier using M random reference patterns asymptotically satisfies a PM(error) "" Poo(error) M2/n' for sufficiently large values of M. Here, Poo(error) denotes the probability of error in the infinite sample limit, and is at most twice the error of a Bayes classifier. Although the value of the coefficient a depends upon the underlying probability distributions, the exponent of M is largely distribution free.We thus obtain a concise relation between a classifier's ability to generalize from a finite reference sample and the dimensionality of the feature space, as well as an analytic validation of Bellman's well known "curse of dimensionality." 1 INTRODUCTION One of the primary tasks assigned to neural networks is pattern classification.

Feature selection and creation are two of the most important and difficult tasks in the field of pattern classification. Good features improve the performance of both conventional and neural network pattern classifiers. Exemplar selection is another task that can reduce the memory and computation requirements of a KNN classifier. These three tasks require a search through a space which is typically so large that 797 798 Chang and Lippmann exhaustive search is impractical. The purpose of this research was to explore the usefulness of Genetic search algorithms for these tasks. Details concerning this research are available in (Chang, 1990).

Eight neural net and conventional pattern classifiers (Bayesianunimodal Gaussian, k-nearest neighbor, standard back-propagation, adaptive-stepsize back-propagation, hypersphere, feature-map, learning vector quantizer, and binary decision tree) were implemented on a serial computer and compared using two speech recognition and two artificial tasks. Error rates were statistically equivalent on almost all tasks, but classifiers differed by orders of magnitude in memory requirements, training time, classification time, and ease of adaptivity. Nearest-neighbor classifiers trained rapidly but required the most memory. Tree classifiers provided rapid classification but were complex to adapt. Back-propagation classifiers typically required long training times and had intermediate memory requirements. These results suggest that classifier selection should often depend more heavily on practical considerations concerning memory and computation resources, and restrictions on training and classification times than on error rate.

Eight neural net and conventional pattern classifiers (Bayesianunimodal Gaussian, k-nearest neighbor, standard back-propagation, adaptive-stepsize back-propagation, hypersphere, feature-map, learning vector quantizer, and binary decision tree) were implemented on a serial computer and compared using two speech recognition and two artificial tasks. Error rates were statistically equivalent on almost all tasks, but classifiers differed by orders of magnitude in memory requirements, training time, classification time, and ease of adaptivity. Nearest-neighbor classifiers trained rapidly but required the most memory. Tree classifiers provided rapid classification but were complex to adapt. Back-propagation classifiers typically required long training times and had intermediate memory requirements. These results suggest that classifier selection should often depend more heavily on practical considerations concerning memory and computation resources, and restrictions on training and classification times than on error rate.

Eight neural net and conventional pattern classifiers (Bayesianunimodal Gaussian,k-nearest neighbor, standard back-propagation, adaptive-stepsize back-propagation, hypersphere, feature-map, learning vectorquantizer, and binary decision tree) were implemented on a serial computer and compared using two speech recognition and two artificial tasks. Error rates were statistically equivalent on almost all tasks, but classifiers differed by orders of magnitude in memory requirements, training time, classification time, and ease of adaptivity. Nearest-neighbor classifiers trained rapidly but required themost memory. Tree classifiers provided rapid classification but were complex to adapt. Back-propagation classifiers typically requiredlong training times and had intermediate memory requirements. These results suggest that classifier selection should often depend more heavily on practical considerations concerning memory and computation resources, and restrictions on training and classification times than on error rate.

Previous work on nets with continuous-valued inputs led to generative procedures to construct convex decision regions with two-layer perceptrons (one hidden layer) and arbitrary decision regions with three-layer perceptrons (two hidden layers). Here we demonstrate that two-layer perceptron classifiers trained with back propagation can form both convex and disjoint decision regions. Such classifiers are robust, train rapidly, and provide good performance with simple decision regions. When complex decision regions are required, however, convergence time can be excessively long and performance is often no better than that of k-nearest neighbor classifiers. Three neural net classifiers are presented that provide more rapid training under such situations. Two use fixed weights in the first one or two layers and are similar to classifiers that estimate probability density functions using histograms. A third "feature map classifier" uses both unsupervised and supervised training. It provides good performance with little supervised training in situations such as speech recognition where much unlabeled training data is available. The architecture of this classifier can be used to implement a neural net k-nearest neighbor classifier.

Previous work on nets with continuous-valued inputs led to generative procedures to construct convex decision regions with two-layer perceptrons (one hidden layer) and arbitrary decision regions with three-layer perceptrons (two hidden layers). Here we demonstrate that two-layer perceptron classifiers trained with back propagation can form both convex and disjoint decision regions. Such classifiers are robust, train rapidly, and provide good performance with simple decision regions. When complex decision regions are required, however, convergence time can be excessively long and performance is often no better than that of k-nearest neighbor classifiers. Three neural net classifiers are presented that provide more rapid training under such situations. Two use fixed weights in the first one or two layers and are similar to classifiers that estimate probability density functions using histograms. A third "feature map classifier" uses both unsupervised and supervised training. It provides good performance with little supervised training in situations such as speech recognition where much unlabeled training data is available. The architecture of this classifier can be used to implement a neural net k-nearest neighbor classifier.