A comparative study of multi-objective pso- fuzzy optimization with weka classification algorithms to improve the interpretability and accuracy in medical data

  • Authors

    • Alwatben Batoul Rashed A Qassim university
    • Abeer Alhujaylan
    2024-01-15
    https://doi.org/10.14419/7x1pk007

  • Designing an Automatic Fuzzy Rule-based Classification Systems (FRBCSs) is considered as optimization problem associated to a result of high interpretability and accuracy. Interpretability and accuracy are the two main objectives to be improved in the optimization measurement of FRBCSs. However, improving these objectives is found to be difficult in most of the existing systems due to the conflicting issues between accuracy and interpretability. Evolutionary algorithms have been extensively used to resolve problems associated with multiple and often conflicting objectives. The objective of a multi- objective optimization algorithm is to define the collection of best trade- offs between objectives. Among multi-objective evolutionary algorithms proposed in the literature, particle swarm optimization (PSO)-based multi-objective (MOPSO) algorithm has been cited to be the most representative. This paper presents a comparative analysis of Machine Learning (ML) algorithms for Fuzzy Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (FMOEs) with WEKA Classification algorithms of data using8 publicly available datasets from the Knowledge Extraction based on Evolutionary Learning (KEEL) repository. FMOEs method is evaluated on a popular benchmark data set being used in a medical domain for evaluations. The result obtained shows that the FMOEs method yields an optimum solution in minimizing the trade-off between accuracy and interpretability. These findings add to a better understanding of the trade-offs between accuracy and interpretability in the algorithms under consideration, assisting academics and practitioners in picking the best algorithm for classification tasks.

  • References

    1. N. and B. M. R. and M. A.-M. E. and T. V. K. Esfandiari, “Knowledge discovery in medicine: Current issue and future trend,” Expert Syst Appl, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 4434–4463, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.01.011.
    2. M. B. Gorzałczany and F. Rudziński, “Interpretable and accurate medical data classification – a multi-objective genetic-fuzzy optimization approach,” Expert Syst Appl, vol. 71, pp. 26–39, Apr. 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.017.
    3. J. Chen, H. Huang, S. Tian, and Y. Qu, “Feature selection for text classification with Naïve Bayes,” Expert Syst Appl, vol. 36, no. 3 PART 1, pp. 5432–5435, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.054.
    4. M. Fazzolari, R. Alcalá, and F. Herrera, “A multi-objective evolutionary method for learning granularities based on fuzzy discretization to improve the accuracy-complexity trade-off of fuzzy rule-based classification systems: D-MOFARC algorithm,” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 24, pp. 470–481, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.07.019.
    5. R. Alcala Jesu’s Alcala-Fdez, M. J. Gacto, and F. Herrera, “A Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm for Rule Selection and Tuning on Fuzzy Rule-Based Systems,” in 2007 IEEE International Fuzzy Systems Conference, IEEE, 2007, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZY.2007.4295566.
    6. M. J. Gacto, R. Alcalá, and F. Herrera, “An Improved Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm for Tuning Linguistic Fuzzy Systems,” Proceedings of Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems (IPMU’08), pp. 1121–1128, 2008.
    7. F. Jiménez, G. Sánchez, and J. M. Juárez, “Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for fuzzy classification in survival prediction,” Artif Intell Med, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 197–219, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2013.12.006.
    8. M. B. Gorzałczany and Filip Rudziński, “Genetic fuzzy rule-based modelling of dynamic systems using time series,” in Swarm and Evolutionary Computation: International Symposia, SIDE 2012 and EC 2012, Held in Conjunction with ICAISC 2012, Zakopane, Poland, April 29-May 3, 2012. Proceedings, Springer, Ed., 2012, pp. 231–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29353-5_27.
    9. C. A. C. Coello, G. B. Lamont, and D. A. and Van Veldhuizen, Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems, vol. 5. Springer, 2007.
    10. G. Armano and M. R. Farmani, “Multiobjective clustering analysis using particle swarm optimization,” Expert Syst Appl, vol. 55, pp. 184–193, Aug. 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.02.009.
    11. R. S. Rosenberg, “Simulation of genetic populations with biochemical properties,” Math Biosci, vol. 7, no. 3–4, pp. 223–257, 1970. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(70)90126-4.
    12. J. D. Schaffer, “Multiple objective optimization with vector evaluated genetic algorithms,” in Proceedings of the first international conference on genetic algorithms and their applications, Psychology Press, 2014, pp. 93–100.
    13. N. Srinivas and K. Deb, “Muiltiobjective optimization using nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms,” Evol Comput, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 221–248, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1162/evco.1994.2.3.221.
    14. J. Horn, N. Nafpliotis, and D. E. Goldberg, “A niched pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization,” in Proceedings of the first IEEE conference on evolutionary computation. IEEE world congress on computational intelligence, 1994, pp. 82–87.
    15. C. M. Fonseca, P. J. Fleming, and others, “Genetic algorithms for multi objective optimization: formulation discussion and generalization,” in Icga, Citeseer, 1993, pp. 416–423.
    16. Z. Eckart, L. Marco, and T. Lothar, “Improving the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization,” EUROGEN, Evol. Method Des. Optim. Control Ind. Problem, pp. 1–21, 2000.
    17. K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan, “A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II,” IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182–197, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017.
    18. J. D. Knowles and D. W. Corne, “Approximating the non dominated front using the Pareto archived evolution strategy,” Evol Comput, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 149–172, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1162/106365600568167.
    19. M. Hall, E. and H. G. and P. B. Frank, P. Reutemann, and I. H. Witten, “The WEKA data mining software: an update,” ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 10–18, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1145/1656274.1656278.
    20. K. A. Y. A. Yılmaz and Ramazan Tekin, “Comparison of discretization methods for classifier decision trees and decision rules on medical data sets,” Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, no. 35, pp. 275–281, 2022.
    21. A. Rajput, R. P. Aharwal, M. Dubey, S. Saxena, and M. Raghuvanshi, “J48 and JRIP rules for e-governance data,” International Journal of Computer Science and Security (IJCSS)}, vol. 5, no. 2, 2011.
    22. E. Frank and I. H. Witten, Generating accurate rule sets without global optimization. University of Waikato, Department of Computer Science, 1998.
    23. V. Barot, S. S. Chauhan, and B. Patel, “Feature selection for modeling intrusion detection,” International Journal of Computer Network and Information Security (IJCNIS), vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 56–62, 2014. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijcnis.2014.07.08.
    24. H. Ishibuchi and T. Nakashima, “Effect of Rule Weights in Fuzzy Rule-Based Classification Systems Effect of Rule Weights in Fuzzy Rule-Based Classification Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 506–515, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1109/91.940964.
    25. M. R. Sierra and C. A. Coello Coello, “Improving PSO-based multi-objective optimization using crowding, mutation and∈-dominance,” in Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization: Third International Conference, EMO 2005, Guanajuato, Mexico, March 9-11, 2005. Proceedings 3, Springer, 2005, pp. 505–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31880-4_35.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Batoul Rashed A , A., & Alhujaylan , A. (2024). A comparative study of multi-objective pso- fuzzy optimization with weka classification algorithms to improve the interpretability and accuracy in medical data. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 13(1), 36-41. https://doi.org/10.14419/7x1pk007