Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of eight classifiers for 2D and 3D image classification. The average classification accuracy on test data (from 10-fold cross-validation) is shown for the optimal parameters settings (shown in parentheses) for each classification approach. The parameters are: nhu – number of hidden nodes in neural network, stop-fract – the fraction of the training data used to stop neural network training, C – error penalty in SVMs, sigma – kernel variance in SVMs, nboost – total number of iterations in AdaBoost, nbag – total number of iterations in Bagging, nhug – number of hidden nodes in the gating network of Mixtures-of-Experts, and ne – total number of experts in Mixtures-of-Experts. The accuracies across the 10-fold cross-validation trials were compared to those for the previously described neural network configuration (nhu = 20, stop-fract = 0.3) by a paired t-test (88% for SLF13, 86% for SLF8, 93% for SLF10, and 84% for SLF14). The best performances are underscored and highlighted for each feature set. *CPU times listed for each classifier are for training and testing for all images in each cross-validation trial (training times include times calculating features), which were measured on an Athlon 1.7 GHz processor with 1.5 GB memory running Redhat Linux 7.1.

From: Boosting accuracy of automated classification of fluorescence microscope images for location proteomics

Feature Set

Classifier

Classification accuracy (%)

Average training time* (s)

Average testing time* (s)

P-value

SLF13 (2D DNA)

Neural Network (nhu = 16, stop-fract = 0.1)

87.8

116.3

0.001

0.43

 

SVM (linear, DAG, C = 1)

87.9

0.7

0.088

0.36

 

SVM (rbf, DAG, sigma = 8, C = 16)

89.4

1.1

0.470

0.03

 

SVM (exprbf, maxwin, sigma = 4, C = 4)

89.2

3.5

0.530

0.04

 

SVM (poly, maxwin, degree = 2, C = 0.01)

88.6

4.7

0.140

0.21

 

Adaboost (nhu = 8, nboost = 64)

88.9

55.2

0.018

0.10

 

Bagging (nhu = 64, nbag = 32)

88.9

111.0

0.078

0.09

 

Mixtures-of-Experts (nhu = 16, nhug = 64, ne = 16)

89.7

38.3

0.010

0.02

SLF8 (2D)

Neural Network (nhu = 16, stop-fract = 0.3)

86.1

139.1

0.001

0.53

 

SVM (linear, DAG, C = 1)

84.9

0.7

0.075

0.83

 

SVM (rbf, maxwin, sigma = 8, C = 64)

87.9

11.4

1.600

0.15

 

SVM (exprbf, maxwin, sigma = 8, C = 16)

88.1

4.0

0.540

0.02

 

SVM (poly, maxwin, degree = 2, C = 0.01)

86.7

5.2

0.170

0.37

 

Adaboost (nhu = 32, nboost = 128)

88.2

412.0

0.190

0.12

 

Bagging (nhu = 64, nbag = 64)

87.2

238.2

0.160

0.17

 

Mixtures-of-Experts (nhu = 32, nhug = 16, ne = 4)

87.0

11.6

0.002

0.22

SLF10 (3D DNA)

Neural Network (nhu = 32, stop-fract = 0.1)

95.3

740.3

0.001

0.06

 

SVM (linear, DAG, C = 8)

93.3

0.3

0.043

0.47

 

SVM (rbf, maxwin, sigma = 2, C = 64)

95.0

2.3

0.230

0.08

 

SVM (exprbf, DAG, sigma = 1, C = 1)

95.2

0.5

0.081

0.06

 

SVM (poly, maxwin, degree = 2, C = 1)

93.1

2.0

0.067

0.51

 

Adaboost (nhu = 32, nboost = 32)

93.2

43.2

0.016

0.46

 

Bagging (nhu = 64, nbag = 4)

89.4

6.8

0.003

0.99

 

Mixtures-of-Experts (nhu = 32, nhug = 64, ne = 16)

92.2

45.8

0.007

0.74

SLF14 (3D)

Neural Network (nhu = 32, stop-fract = 0)

88.4

172.0

0.001

0.02

 

SVM (linear, DAG, C = 32)

86.5

1.0

0.047

0.12

 

SVM (rbf, maxwin, sigma = 2, C = 32)

86.6

4.6

0.290

0.17

 

SVM (exprbf, maxwin, sigma = 2, C = 8)

89.1

1.4

0.170

0.05

 

SVM (poly, maxwin, degree = 2, C = 2)

87.3

8.3

0.068

0.05

 

Adaboost (nhu = 64, nboost = 64)

87.7

144.3

0.085

0.03

 

Bagging (nhu = 64, nbag = 256)

82.2

505.7

0.340

0.82

 

Mixtures-of-Experts (nhu = 16, nhug = 8, ne = 2)

83.8

2.9

0.001

0.59