Impacts of Sample Design for Validation Data on the Accuracy of Feedforward Neural Network Classification
Source abstract
Abstract
Validation data are often used to evaluate the performance of a trained neural network and used in the selection of a network deemed optimal for the task at-hand. Optimality is commonly assessed with a measure, such as overall classification accuracy. The latter is often calculated directly from a confusion matrix showing the counts of cases in the validation set with particular labelling properties. The sample design used to form the validation set can, however, influence the estimated magnitude of the accuracy. Commonly, the validation set is formed with a stratified sample to give balanced classes, but also via random sampling, which reflects class abundance. It is suggested that if the ultimate aim is to accurately classify a dataset in which the classes do vary in abundance, a validation set formed via random, rather than stratified, sampling is preferred. This is illustrated with the classification of simulated and remotely-sensed datasets. With both datasets, statistically significant differences in the accuracy with which the data could be classified arose from the use of validation sets formed via random and stratified sampling (z = 2.7 and 1.9 for the simulated and real datasets respectively, for both p < 0.05%). The accuracy of the classifications that used a stratified sample in validation were smaller, a result of cases of an abundant class being commissioned into a rarer class. Simple means to address the issue are suggested.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Neural Networks and Applications · Fault Detection and Control Systems · Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Geography, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. Tso, B., and Mather, P.M. (2001). Classification Methods for Remotely Sensed Data, Taylor & Francis. [2nd ed.].10.4324/9780203303566 ↗
2. The application of artificial neural networks to the analysis of remotely sensed data10.1080/01431160701352154 ↗
3. Artificial neural networks and remote sensing10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00215.x ↗
4. Spectral-spatial classification of hyperspectral images using deep convolutional neural networks10.1080/2150704X.2015.1047045 ↗
5. Integration of Bayesian regulation back-propagation neural network and particle swarm optimization for enhancing sub-pixel mapping of flood inundation in river basins10.1080/2150704X.2016.1177238 ↗
6. Multi-source image classification II: An empirical comparison of evidential reasoning and neural network approaches10.1080/07038992.1994.10874582 ↗
7. A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance10.1080/01431160600746456 ↗
8. An experimental comparison of neural and statistical non-parametric algorithms for supervised classification of remote-sensing images10.1016/S0167-8655(96)00090-6 ↗
9. A review and analysis of backpropagation neural networks for classification of remotely-sensed multi-spectral imagery10.1080/01431169508954607 ↗
10. The use of backpropagating artificial neural networks in land cover classification10.1080/0143116031000114851 ↗
11. Evaluation of SVM, RVM and SMLR for accurate image classification with limited ground data10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2215310 ↗
12. Foody, G.M., Pal, M., Rocchini, D., Garzon-Lopez, C.X., and Bastin, L. (2016). The sensitivity of mapping methods to reference data quality: Training supervised image classifications with imperfect reference data. ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf., 5.10.3390/ijgi5110199 ↗
13. Antoniou, V., Fonte, C.C., See, L., Estima, J., Arsanjani, J.J., Lupia, F., Minghini, M., Foody, G., and Fritz, S. (2016). Investigating the feasibility of geo-tagged photographs as sources of land cover input data. ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf., 5.10.3390/ijgi5050064 ↗
14. Increasing the accuracy of neural network classification using refined training data10.1016/j.envsoft.2008.11.012 ↗
15. The effect of training set size and composition on artificial neural network classification10.1080/01431169508954507 ↗
16. Optimisation of training data required for neuro-classification10.1080/01431169408954326 ↗
17. Hard and soft classifications by a neural network with a non-exhaustively defined set of classes10.1080/01431160110109570 ↗
18. Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015 ↗
19. Basic probability sampling designs for thematic map accuracy assessment10.1080/014311699212100 ↗
20. Variability and bias in experimentally measured classifier error rates10.1016/0167-8655(92)90097-J ↗
21. Garson, G.D. (1998). Neural Networks: An Introductory Guide for Social Scientists, Sage.
22. Touretzky, D., Hinton, G., and Sejnowsjki, T. (1989). Scaling and generalisation in neural networks: A case study. Proceedings 1988 Connectionist Models Summer School, Morgan Kaufmann.
23. The significance of border training patterns in classification by a feedforward neural network using back propagation learning10.1080/014311699211192 ↗
24. Comparison of classification algorithms and training sample sizes in urban land classification with Landsat thematic mapper imagery10.3390/rs6020964 ↗
25. Improving specific class mapping from remotely sensed data by cost-sensitive learning10.1080/01431161.2017.1292073 ↗
26. Ma, X., Tong, X., Liu, S., Luo, X., Xie, H., and Li, C. (2017). Optimized sample selection in SVM classification by combining with DMSP-OLS, Landsat NDVI and GlobeLand30 products for extracting urban built-up areas. Remote Sens., 9.10.3390/rs9030236 ↗
27. Toward intelligent training of supervised image classifications: Directing training data acquisition for SVM classification10.1016/j.rse.2004.06.017 ↗
28. Using genetic algorithms to improve pattern classification performance
29. Crop classification by support vector machine with intelligently selected training data for an operational application10.1080/01431160701395203 ↗
30. Multiple classifier system for remote sensing image classification: A review10.3390/s120404764 ↗
31. The use of small training sets containing mixed pixels for accurate hard image classification: Training on mixed spectral responses for classification by a SVM10.1016/j.rse.2006.04.001 ↗
32. Statistical generation of training sets for measuring NO3−, NH4+ and major ions in natural waters using an ion selective electrode array10.1039/C6EM00043F ↗
33. Bishop, C.M. (1995). Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition, Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198538493.001.0001 ↗
34. Lek, S., and Guegan, J.-F. (2000). Neuronal networks: Algorithms and architectures for ecologists and evolutionary ecologists. Artificial Neuronal Networks. Application to Ecology and Evolution, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-57030-8_1 ↗
35. Classification accuracy improvement of neural network classifiers by using unlabeled data10.1109/36.673695 ↗
36. Bias and variance of validation methods for function approximation neural networks under conditions of sparse data10.1109/5326.704579 ↗
37. Automatic early stopping using cross validation: Quantifying the criteria10.1016/S0893-6080(98)00010-0 ↗
38. Feedforward neural network construction using cross validation10.1162/089976601317098565 ↗
39. Huynh, T.Q., and Setiono, R. (August, January 31). Effective neural network pruning using cross-validation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, Montreal, QC, Canada.
40. Decision boundary feature extraction for neural networks10.1109/72.554193 ↗
41. Artificial neural networks in bankruptcy prediction: General framework and cross-validation analysis10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00051-4 ↗
42. Support vector machines for classification in remote sensing10.1080/01431160512331314083 ↗
43. Mapping land use/cover in a tropical coastal area using satellite sensor data, GIS and artificial neural networks10.1016/j.ecss.2003.08.011 ↗
44. Modelling deforestation using GIS and artificial neural networks10.1016/S1364-8152(03)00161-0 ↗
45. Thematic map comparison: Evaluating the statistical significance of differences in classification accuracy10.14358/PERS.70.5.627 ↗
46. Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical Data Analysis, Wiley. [2nd ed.].10.1002/0471249688 ↗
47. Improved validation framework and R-package for artificial neural network models10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.01.023 ↗