Mr. Nathan J. Leap Profile

Nathan J. Leap

at Air Force Institute of Technology

SPIE Involvement:

Author

Publications (2)

This will count as one of your downloads.

You will have access to both the presentation and article (if available).

DOWNLOAD NOW

This content is available for download via your institution's subscription. To access this item, please sign in to your personal account.

Email or Username Forgot your username?

Password Forgot your password?

Show

Keep me signed in

No SPIE account? Create an account

Proceedings Article | 17 April 2008 Paper

A confidence paradigm for classification systems

Nathan Leap, Kenneth Bauer

Proceedings Volume 6968, 69680U (2008) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.776755

KEYWORDS: Probability theory, Classification systems, Pattern recognition, Automatic target recognition, Cancer, Tolerancing, Binary data, Distance measurement, Data modeling, Image classification

Read Abstract +

There is no universally accepted methodology to determine how much confidence one should have in a classifier output. This research proposes a framework to determine the level of confidence in an indication from a classifier system where the output is a measurement value. There are two types of confidence developed in this paper. The first is confidence in a classification system or classifier and is denoted classifier confidence. The second is the confidence in the output of a classification system or classifier. In this paradigm, we posit that the confidence in the output of a classifier should be, on average, equal to the confidence in the classifier as a whole (i.e., classifier confidence). The amount of confidence in a given classifier is estimated using multiattribute preference theory and forms the foundation for a quadratic confidence function that is applied to posterior probability estimates. Classifier confidence is currently determined based upon individual measurable value functions for classification accuracy, average entropy, and sample size, and the form of the overall measurable value function is multilinear based upon the assumption of weak difference independence. Using classifier confidence, a quadratic function is trained to be the confidence function which inputs a posterior probability and outputs the confidence in a given indication. In this paradigm, confidence is not equal to the posterior probability estimate but is related to it. This confidence measure is a direct link between traditional decision analysis techniques and traditional pattern recognition techniques. This methodology is applied to two real world data sets, and results show the sort of behavior that would be expected from a rational confidence measure.

Proceedings Article | 9 August 2004 Paper

Quantifying the correlation effects of fused classifiers

Christine Schubert, Nathan Leap, Mark Oxley, Kenneth Bauer

Proceedings Volume 5429, (2004) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.542578

KEYWORDS: Probability theory, Receivers, Sensors, Target recognition, Analytical research, Feature extraction, Mathematics, Statistical modeling, Pattern recognition, Defense and security

Read Abstract +

Typically, when considering multiple classifiers, researchers assume that they are independent. Under this assumption estimates for the performance of the fused classifiers are easier to obtain and quantify mathematically. But, in fact, classifiers may be correlated, thus, the performance of the fused classifiers will be over-estimated. This paper will address the issue of the dependence between the classifiers to be fused. Specifically, we will assume a level of dependence between two classifiers for a given fusion rule and produce a formula to quantify the performance of this newly fused classifier. The performance of the fused classifiers will then be evaluated via the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. A classifier typically relies on parameters that may vary over a given range. Thus, the probability of true and false positives can be computed over this range of values. The graph of these probabilities over this range then produces the ROC curve. The probability of true positive and false positive from the fused classifiers are developed according to various decision rules. Examples of dependent fused classifiers will be given for various levels of dependency and multiple decision rules.

My Library

You currently do not have any folders to save your paper to! Create a new folder below.

Folder Name

Folder Description

View contact details

UPDATE YOUR PROFILE

Is this your profile? Update it now.

Sign into your SPIE.org account

Don’t have a profile and want one?

Create an account on SPIE.org

Access to the requested content is limited to institutions that have purchased or subscribe to SPIE eBooks. You are receiving this notice because your organization may not have SPIE eBooks access.*

*Shibboleth/Open Athens users─please sign in to access your institution's subscriptions.

To obtain this item, you may purchase the complete book in print or electronic format on SPIE.org.

ORGANIZATIONAL
Sign in with credentials provided by your organization.

Organizational Username

Organizational Password

Show/Hide Password

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available

Members:

Non-members: ADD TO CART

Keywords/Phrases

Search In:

Publication Years