Related Datasets in Oracle DV Machine Learning models


Depending on the algorithm/model that generates this dataset metrics present in the dataset will vary. Here is a list of metrics based on the model: Linear Regression, CART numeric, Elastic Net Linear: R-Square, R-Square Adjusted, Mean Absolute Error(MAE), Mean Squared Error(MSE), Relative Absolute Error(RAE), Related Squared Error(RSE), Root Mean Squared Error(RMSE) CART(Classification And Regression Trees), Naive Bayes Classification, Neural Network, Support Vector Machine(SVM), Random Forest, Logistic Regression: Now you know what the Related datasets are and how they can be useful for fine tuning your Machine Learning model or for comparing two different models. .

What's New in MATLAB Data Analytics


Use neighborhood component analysis (NCA) to choose features for machine learning models. Manipulate and analyze data that is too big to fit in memory. Perform support vector machine (SVM) and Naive Bayes classification, create bags of decision trees, and fit lasso regression on out-of-memory data. Manipulate, compare, and store text data efficiently . Develop clients for MATLAB Production Server in any programming language that supports HTTP.

Evaluating WordNet Features in Text Classification Models

AAAI Conferences

Incorporating semantic features from the WordNet lexical database is among one of the many approaches that have been tried to improve the predictive performance of text classification models. The intuition behind this is that keywords in the training set alone may not be extensive enough to enable generation of a universal model for a category, but if we incorporate the word relationships in WordNet, a more accurate model may be possible. Other researchers have previously evaluated the effectiveness of incorporating WordNet synonyms, hypernyms, and hyponyms into text classification models. Generally, they have found that improvements in accuracy using features derived from these relationships are dependent upon the nature of the text corpora from which the document collections are extracted. In this paper, we not only reconsider the role of WordNet synonyms, hypernyms, and hyponyms in text classification models, we also consider the role of WordNet meronyms and holonyms. Incorporating these WordNet relationships into a Coordinate Matching classifier, a Naive Bayes classifier, and a Support Vector Machine classifier, we evaluate our approach on six document collections extracted from the Reuters-21578, USENET, and Digi-Trad text corpora. Experimental results show that none of the WordNet relationships were effective at increasing the accuracy of the Naive Bayes classifier. Synonyms, hypernyms, and holonyms were effective at increasing the accuracy of the Coordinate Matching classifier, and hypernyms were effective at increasing the accuracy of the SVM classifier.

Who’s Calling? Demographics of Mobile Phone Use in Rwanda

AAAI Conferences

We describe how new sources of data can be used to better understand the demographic structure of the population of Rwandan mobile phone users. After combining anonymous call data records with follow-up phone interviews, we detect significant differences in phone usage among different social and economic subgroups of the population. However, initial experiments suggest that predicting demographics from call usage, and vice-versa, is quite difficult.

Supervised classification for object identification in urban areas using satellite imagery Machine Learning

This paper presents a useful method to achieve classification in satellite imagery. The approach is based on pixel level study employing various features such as correlation, homogeneity, energy and contrast. In this study gray-scale images are used for training the classification model. For supervised classification, two classification techniques are employed namely the Support Vector Machine (SVM) and the Naive Bayes. With textural features used for gray-scale images, Naive Bayes performs better with an overall accuracy of 76% compared to 68% achieved by SVM. The computational time is evaluated while performing the experiment with two different window sizes i.e., 50x50 and 70x70. The required computational time on a single image is found to be 27 seconds for a window size of 70x70 and 45 seconds for a window size of 50x50.