Radial-Based Approach to Imbalanced Data Oversampling

  • Michał KoziarskiEmail author
  • Bartosz Krawczyk
  • Michał Woźniak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10334)


The difficulty of the many practical decision problem lies in the nature of analyzed data. One of the most important real data characteristic is imbalance among examples from different classes. Despite more than two decades of research, imbalanced data classification is still one of the vital challenges to be addressed. The traditional classification algorithms display strongly biased performance on imbalanced datasets. One of the most popular way to deal with such a problem is to modify the learning set to decrease disproportion between objects from different classes using over- or undersampling approaches. In this work a novel preprocessing technique for imbalanced datasets is presented, which takes into consideration the mutual density class distribution. The proposed approach has been evaluated on the basis of the computer experiments carried out on the benchmark datasets. Their results seem to confirm the usefulness of the proposed concept in comparison to the state-of-art methods.


Machine learning Classification Imbalanced data Oversampling Radial basis functions 



This work was supported by the Polish National Science Center under the grant no. UMO-2015/19/B/ST6/01597 as well as the PLGrid Infrastructure.


  1. 1.
    Ahmed, F., Samorani, M., Bellinger, C., Zaïane, O.R.: Advantage of integration in big data: Feature generation in multi-relational databases for imbalanced learning. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, BigData 2016, Washington DC, USA, 5–8 December 2016, pp. 532–539 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alcalá, J., Fernández, A., Luengo, J., Derrac, J., García, S., Sánchez, L., Herrera, F.: KEEL data-mining software tool: Data set repository, integration of algorithms and experimental analysis framework. J. Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput. 17(2–3), 255–287 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellinger, C., Sharma, S., Japkowicz, N.: One-class versus binary classification: Which and when? In: 11th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications, ICMLA, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 12–15 December 2012, vol. 2. pp. 102–106 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Branco, P., Torgo, L., Ribeiro, R.P.: A survey of predictive modeling on imbalanced domains. ACM Comput. Surv. 49(2), 31:1–31:50 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bunkhumpornpat, C., Sinapiromsaran, K., Lursinsap, C.: Safe-level-SMOTE: safe-level-synthetic minority over-sampling technique for handling the class imbalanced problem. In: Theeramunkong, T., Kijsirikul, B., Cercone, N., Ho, T.-B. (eds.) PAKDD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5476, pp. 475–482. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-01307-2_43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chawla, N.V., Bowyer, K.W., Hall, L.O., Kegelmeyer, W.P.: SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 16, 321–357 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chawla, N.V., Lazarevic, A., Hall, L.O., Bowyer, K.W.: SMOTEBoost: improving prediction of the minority class in boosting. In: Lavrač, N., Gamberger, D., Todorovski, L., Blockeel, H. (eds.) PKDD 2003. LNCS, vol. 2838, pp. 107–119. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-39804-2_12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Domingos, P.M.: Metacost: a general method for making classifiers cost-sensitive. In: Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Diego, CA, USA, 15–18 August 1999, pp. 155–164 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Han, H., Wang, W.-Y., Mao, B.-H.: Borderline-SMOTE: a new over-sampling method in imbalanced data sets learning. In: Huang, D.-S., Zhang, X.-P., Huang, G.-B. (eds.) ICIC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3644, pp. 878–887. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi: 10.1007/11538059_91 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    He, H., Bai, Y., Garcia, E.A., Li, S.: ADASYN: adaptive synthetic sampling approach for imbalanced learning. In: IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, IJCNN 2008. (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence), pp. 1322–1328. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Porwik, P., Doroz, R., Orczyk, T.: Signatures verification based on PNN classifier optimised by PSO algorithm. Pattern Recogn. 60, 998–1014 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ramentol, E., Caballero, Y., Bello, R., Herrera, F.: SMOTE-RSB*: a hybrid preprocessing approach based on oversampling and undersampling for high imbalanced data-sets using SMOTE and rough sets theory. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 33(2), 245–265 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tomek, I.: Two modifications of CNN. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 6(11), 769–772 (1976)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Triguero, I., Galar, M., Merino, D., Maillo, J., Bustince, H., Herrera, F.: Evolutionary undersampling for extremely imbalanced big data classification under apache spark. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC 2016, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 24–29 July 2016, pp. 640–647 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilson, D.L.: Asymptotic properties of nearest neighbor rules using edited data. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 2(3), 408–421 (1972)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wozniak, M., Graña, M., Corchado, E.: A survey of multiple classifier systems as hybrid systems. Inf. Fusion 16, 3–17 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michał Koziarski
    • 1
    Email author
  • Bartosz Krawczyk
    • 2
  • Michał Woźniak
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systems and Computer NetworksWrocław University of Science and TechnologyWrocławPoland
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations