Advertisement

Development of Fast and Reliable Nature-Inspired Computing for Supervised Learning in High-Dimensional Data

  • Hiram PonceEmail author
  • Guillermo González-Mora
  • Elizabeth Morales-Olvera
  • Paulo Souza
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume SCI 871)

Abstract

Machine learning and data mining tasks in big data involve different nature of inputs that typically exhibit high dimensionality, e.g. more than 1,000 features, far from current acceptable scales computing in one machine. In many different domains, data have highly nonlinear representations that nature-inspired models can easily capture, outperforming simple models. But, the usage of these approaches in high-dimensional data are computationally costly. Recently, artificial hydrocarbon networks (AHN)—a supervised learning method inspired on organic chemical structures and mechanisms—have shown improvements in predictive power and interpretability in contrast with other well-known machine learning models, such as neural networks and random forests. However, AHN are very time-consuming that are not able to deal with big data until now. In this chapter, we present a fast and reliable nature-inspired training method for AHN, so they can handle high-dimensional data. This training method comprises a population-based meta-heuristic optimization with defined both individual encoding and objective function related to the AHN-model, and it is also implemented in parallel-computing. After benchmark performing of population-based optimization methods, grey wolf optimization (GWO) was selected. Our results demonstrate that the proposed hybrid GWO-based training method for AHN runs more than 1400x faster in high-dimensional data, without loss of predictability, yielding a fast and reliable nature-inspired machine learning model. We also present a use case in assisted living monitoring, i.e. human fall classification comprising 1,269 features from sensor signals and video recordings, with this proposed training algorithm to show its implementation and performance. We anticipate our new training algorithm to be useful in many applications like medical engineering, robotics, finance, aerospace, and others, in which big data is essential.

References

  1. 1.
    Anter, A.M., and M. Ali. 2019. Feature selection strategy based on hybrid crow search optimization algorithm integrated with chaos theory and fuzzy c-means algorithm for medical diagnosis problems. Soft Computing 1–20.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atallah, L., B. Lo, R. King, and G.Z. Yang. 2010. Sensor placement for activity detection using wearable accelerometers. In 2010 International conference on body sensor networks, 24–29. IEEE.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avci, A., S. Bosch, M. Marin-Perianu, R. Marin-Perianu, and P. Havinga. 2010. Activity recognition using inertial sensing for healthcare, wellbeing and sports applications: A survey. In 23rd International conference on architecture of computing systems (ARCS), 1–10. Hannover: Germany.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beheshti, Z., and S.M.H. Shamsuddin. 2013. A review of population-based meta-heuristic algorithms. International Journal of Advances in Soft Computing and its Applications 5 (1): 1–35.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bekkerman, R. 2012. Scaling up machine learning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown, W., C. Foote, B. Iverson, and E. Anslyn. 2011. Organic chemistry. Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bulling, A., U. Blanke, and B. Schiele. 2014. A tutorial on human activity recognition using body-worn inertial sensors. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 46 (3): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carey, F., and R. Sundberg. 2007. Advanced organic chemistry: Part A: Structure and mechanisms. Springer.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dargie, W. 2009. Analysis of time and frequency domain features of accelerometer measurements. In 2009 Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, ICCCN 2009, 1–6. IEEE.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Das, H., A.K. Jena, J. Nayak, B. Naik, and H. Behera. 2015. A novel PSO based back propagation learning-MLP (PSO-BP-MLP) for classification. In Computational intelligence in data mining-volume 2, 461–471. Springer.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Das, H., B. Naik, and H. Behera. 2018. Classification of diabetes mellitus disease (DMD): Ad data mining (DM) approach. In Progress in computing, analytics and networking, 539–549. Springer.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Donoho, D.L., et al. 2000. High-dimensional data analysis: The curses and blessings of dimensionality. AMS Math Challenges Lecture 1 (2000): 32.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dorigo, M., and M. Birattari. 2010. Ant colony optimization. Springer.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Emary, E., H.M. Zawbaa, and A.E. Hassanien. 2016. Binary grey wolf optimization approaches for feature selection. Neurocomputing 172: 371–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Glover, F.W., and G.A. Kochenberger. 2006. Handbook of metaheuristics, vol. 57. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goldberg, D.E. 1989. Genetic algorithms in search. Optimization, and machine learning.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hassan, M.M., Z. Uddin, A. Mohamed, and A. Almogren. 2018. A robust human activity recognition system using smartphone sensors and deep learning. Future Generation Computer Systems 81: 307–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    He, Y.L., X.L. Zhang, W. Ao, and J.Z. Huang. 2018. Determining the optimal temperature parameter for softmax function in reinforcement learning. Applied Soft Computing 70: 80–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hiram Ponce, S.G. 2019. An indoor predicting climate conditions approach using internet-of-things and artificial hydrocarbon networks. Measurement 135: 170–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hou, M., H. Wang, Z. Xiao, and G. Zhang. 2018. An svm fall recognition algorithm based on a gravity acceleration sensor. Systems Science & Control Engineering 6 (3): 208–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Igual, R., C. Medrano, and I. Plaza. 2015. A comparison of public datasets for acceleration-based fall detection. Medical Engineering & Physics 37 (9): 870–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jia, H., Z. Xing, and W. Song. 2019. Three dimensional pulse coupled neural network based on hybrid optimization algorithm for oil pollution image segmentation. Remote Sensing 11 (9): 1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kennedy, J. 2010. Particle swarm optimization. Encyclopedia of machine learning, 760–766.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Klein, D. 2011. Organic chemistry. Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kozina, S., H. Gjoreski, and M.G. Lustrek (2013). Efficient activity recognition and fall detection using accelerometers. In International competition on evaluating AAL systems through competitive benchmarking, 13–23. Springer.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manne, P. 2016. Parallel particle swarm optimization. Master Thesis of North Dakota State University.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Marini, F., and B. Walczak. 2015. Particle swarm optimization (PSO). A tutorial. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 149 (Part B): 153–165.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Martinez-Villasenor, L., H. Ponce, J. Brieva, E. Moya-Albor, J. Nunez-Martinez, and C. Penafort-Asturiano Up-fall detection dataset: A multimodal approach. Sensors X (X): XX–XX (in press).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Medrano, C., R. Igual, I. Plaza, and M. Castro. 2014. Detecting falls as novelties in acceleration patterns acquired with smartphones. PloS One 9 (4): e94811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mirjalili, S. 2015. How effective is the grey wolf optimizer in training multi-layer perceptrons. Applied Intelligence 150–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mirjalili, S., S.M. Mirjalili, and A. Lewis. 2014. Grey wolf optimizer. Advances in Engineering Software 69: 46–61.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965997813001853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nayak, J., B. Naik, A. Jena, R.K. Barik, and H. Das. 2018. Nature inspired optimizations in cloud computing: applications and challenges. In Cloud computing for optimization: Foundations, applications, and challenges, 1–26. Springer.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ofli, F., R. Chaudhry, G. Kurillo, R. Vidal, and R. Bajcsy. 2013. Berkeley MHAD: A comprehensive multimodal human action database. In 2013 IEEE workshop on applications of computer vision (WACV), 53–60. IEEE.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ouyang, A., Z. Tang, X. Zhou, Y. Xu, G. Pan, and K. Li. 2015. Parallel hybrid PSO with CUDA for ID heat conduction equation. Computers & Fluids 110: 198–210.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Phinyomark, A., A. Nuidod, P. Phukpattaranont, and C. Limsakul. 2012. Feature extraction and reduction of wavelet transform coefficients for EMG pattern classification. Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika 122 (6): 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ponce, H., and M. Acevedo. 2018. Design and equilibrium control of a force-balanced one-leg mechanism. In Advances in soft computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1–15. Springer.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ponce, H., and L. Martínez-Villasenor. 2017. Interpretability of artificial hydrocarbon networks for breast cancer classification. In 30th International joint conference on neural networks, 3535–3542. IEEE.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ponce, H., L. Martínez-Villasenor, and L. Miralles-Pechuán. 2016. A novel wearable sensor-based human activity recognition approach using artificial hydrocarbon networks. Sensors 16 (7): 1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ponce, H., L. Miralles-Pechuán, L. Martínez-Villasenor. 2015. Artificial hydrocarbon networks for online sales prediction. In Mexican international conference on artificial intelligence, vol. 9414, 498–508. Springer.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ponce, H., L. Miralles-Pechuán, and L. Martínez-Villasenor. 2016. A flexible approach for human activity recognition using artificial hydrocarbon networks. Sensors 16 (11): 1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ponce, H., and P. Ponce. 2011. Artificial organic networks. In Electronics, robotics and automotive mechanics conference (CERMA), 29–34. IEEE.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ponce, H., P. Ponce, H. Bastida, and A. Molina. 2015. A novel robust liquid level controller for coupled-tanks system using artificial hydrocarbon networks. Expert Systems With Applications 42 (22): 8858–8867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ponce, H., P. Ponce, and A. Molina. 2013. Artificial hydrocarbon networks fuzzy inference system. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2013 (531031): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ponce, H., P. Ponce, and A. Molina. 2014. Adaptive noise filtering based on artificial hydrocarbon networks: An application to audio signals. Expert Systems With Applications 41 (14): 6512–6523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ponce, H., P. Ponce, and A. Molina. 2014. Artificial organic networks: Artificial intelligence based on carbon networks, Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 521. Springer.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ponce, H., P. Ponce, and A. Molina. 2015. The development of an artificial organic networks toolkit for labview. Journal of Computational Chemistry 36 (7): 478–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ponce, P., H. Ponce, and A. Molina. 2017. Doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) wind turbine controlled by artificial organic networks. Soft Computing 1–13.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Precup, R.E., R.C. David, and E.M. Petriu. 2017. Grey wolf optimizer algorithm-based tuning of fuzzy control systems with reduced parametric sensitivity. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 64 (1): 527–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Preece, S.J., J.Y. Goulermas, L.P. Kenney, and D. Howard. 2009. A comparison of feature extraction methods for the classification of dynamic activities from accelerometer data. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 56 (3): 871–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rasekh, A., C.A. Chen, and Y. Lu. 2014. Human activity recognition using smartphone. arXiv preprint arXiv:1401.8212.
  51. 51.
    Sahani, R., C. Rout, J.C. Badajena, A.K. Jena, H. Das et al. 2018. Classification of intrusion detection using data mining techniques. In Progress in Computing, Analytics and Networking, 753–764. Springer.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sebastian Gutierrez, H.P. 2019. An intelligent failure detection on a wireless sensor network for indoor climate conditions. Sensors 19 (4).Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Talbi, N. 2019. Design of fuzzy controller rule base using bat algorithm. Energy Procedia 162: 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Teleimmersion Lab, U.O.C. 2013. Berkeley Multimodal Human Action Database (MHAD). http://tele-immersion.citris-uc.org/berkeley_mhad. Accessed 13 Dec 2018.
  55. 55.
    Vavoulas, G., M. Pediaditis, C. Chatzaki, E.G. Spanakis, and M. Tsiknakis. 2017. The mobifall dataset: Fall detection and classification with a smartphone. In Artificial intelligence: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications, 1218–1231. IGI Global.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Xu, G., and G. Yu. 2018. Reprint of: On convergence analysis of particle swarm optimization algorithm. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 340: 709–717.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Xu, T., Y. Zhou, and J. Zhu. 2018. New advances and challenges of fall detection systems: A survey. Applied Sciences 8 (3): 418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yang, X.S., and A. Hossein Gandomi. 2012. Bat algorithm: A novel approach for global engineering optimization. Engineering Computations 29 (5): 464–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Zhang, B., W. Liu, S. Li, W. Wang, H. Zou, and Z. Dou. 2019. Short-term load forecasting based on wavelet neural network with adaptive mutation bat optimization algorithm. IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering 14 (3): 376–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Zhang, Y., S. Wang, and G. Ji. 2015. A comprehensive survey on particle swarm optimization algorithm and its applications. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2015 (931256): 1–38.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Zhao, S., W. Li, W. Niu, R. Gravina, and G. Fortino. 2018. Recognition of human fall events based on single tri-axial gyroscope. In 2018 IEEE 15th International conference on networking, sensing and control (ICNSC), 1–6. IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiram Ponce
    • 1
    Email author
  • Guillermo González-Mora
    • 1
  • Elizabeth Morales-Olvera
    • 1
  • Paulo Souza
    • 2
  1. 1.Facultad de IngenieríaUniversidad PanamericanaCiudad de MéxicoMéxico
  2. 2.Faculty UNA of BetimBetimBrazil

Personalised recommendations