Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Volume Editors
Sushruta Mishra
School of Computer Engineering, Kalinga Institute of Industrial technology
(KIIT) University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
Gyoo-Soo Chae
Division of ICT, Baekseok University, Cheonan, South Korea
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom
525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage
and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to
seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our
arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright
Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by
the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and
experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional
practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in
evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described
herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety
and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or
editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter
of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods,
products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.
ISBN: 978-0-323-85117-6
Contributors xiii
Preface xv
v
vi Contents
2. Metaheuristics in classification 29
2.1 Use of ant colony optimization in classification 30
2.2 Use of genetic algorithms in classification 33
2.3 Use of particle swarm optimization in classification 37
3. Metaheuristics in clustering 40
3.1 Use of ant colony optimization in clustering 41
3.2 Use of genetic algorithms in clustering 45
3.3 Use of particle swarm optimization in clustering 49
4. Metaheuristics in frequent pattern mining 54
4.1 Use of ant colony optimization in frequent pattern mining 54
4.2 Use of genetic algorithms in frequent pattern mining 58
4.3 Use of particle swarm optimization in frequent
pattern mining 61
5. Conclusion 67
References 67
Index 347
Contributors
xiii
xiv Contributors
xv
This page intentionally left blank
Chapter 1
A discourse on metaheuristics
techniques for solving
clustering and semisupervised
learning models
Nishant Kashyap, Anjana Mishra
C.V. Raman Global University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
1. Introduction
A rapid surge of machine learning algorithms have been seen in the last decade
which has also pointed out the need for state-of-the art optimization techniques
to deal with the large amount of data involved. Metaheuristics involving data-
driven methods have shown their effectiveness in better quality of solutions
and better convergence rate.
Metaheuristics methods explore the solution space to find globally opti-
mum solution and improve upon the general searching procedure provided by
the heuristic methods. They guide a basic and simple heuristic method by
inculcating various concepts to exploit the search space of the given problem
[1]. Metaheuristics techniques are generally nondeterministic and approximate
but give good enough solution in reasonable time. Besides, these methods are
particularly well suited to solving nonconvex optimization problems including
the likes of those encountered during clustering. A wide range of meta-
heuristics have been discovered ranging from search-based methods like
simulated annealing and tabu search to the popular nature inspired and the
evolutionary algorithms. A brief discussion on the widely used metaheuristics
is discussed in our study.
Clustering and semisupervised methods are a hot topic today, finding its
uses in multiple important fields ranging from big data, wireless sensor net-
works to bioinformatics to name a few [2]. As such, it has become one of the
most sought after areas in research to improve the performance of the existing
methods involved. Most of the algorithms used for clustering and classification
suffer from drawbacks related to being trapped in the local maxima or minima.
2. Overview of clustering
2.1 K-means clustering
Clustering using k-means basically culminates to assigning the data vectors,
Zp accurately to k clusters.
" Basically, the aim is to minimize
# the sum of the
Pk P
squared errors, i.e., Wp ki 2 by repeating the
j¼1 for all Wp ε cluster ki
following steps for some number of iteration (or till some termination con-
dition is reached):
1. Randomly initialize the cluster centroids. Then, for each data vector Zp,
assign it the cluster with centroids ki(i ¼ 1,2,3, .,k) such that ||Zp e ki|| is
minimum (here, ||x|| represents the Euclidean norm of x)
2. For each cluster, find a the new cluster centroid, Ki such that
P Wp (where |ki| is the number of data vectors in
Ki ¼ jk1i j
for all Wp ε cluster ki
cluster ki)
" #
X
k X
n 2
F¼ Gd Zp kj
ij (1.1)
j¼1 p¼1
Here, d is some value from 1 to infinity which is used to control the weights.
At first all the values of the weights are initialized. Thereafter, the
following steps are repeated till some termination condition:
I. Calculate the cluster centroids.
II. Update the weights.
The cluster centroids are updated as follows:
!, !
X n Xn
kj ¼ Gdij Zi Gdij (1.2)
i¼1 i¼1
➢ For data vector Wp, we first calculate ||WpCij|| (Euclidean norm) to all
the cluster centroids of particle i and then assign each data vector to the
A discourse on metaheuristics techniques Chapter | 1 7
cluster centroids with which it has the least Euclidean norm among all
the cluster centroids.
➢ Then, the fitness for the particle is calculated using the fitness equation.
n The Gbesst and Pbest are then changed accordingly after which the cluster
centroids are updated using the aforementioned Eqs. (1.6) and (1.7).
While k-means for clustering suffers from the problem of being trapped in
the local optimal positions (resulting in less accurate clusters) due to initial
assumptions, clustering using PSO can give the global best resulting in more
accurate clusters. However, it has the problem of very slow convergence rate
toward the end. To do away with this problem, the hybrid PSO and k-means
clustering algorithm can be used wherein the performance of PSO is
improved by seeding the initial particle swarm with the results of k-mean. In
this method, every particle is initialized randomly except one which is
initialized with the result of k-mean. After that, the PSO clustering algorithm
is run.
Here, sij indicates how much pheromone is deposited on the path from i to j.
a indicates the parameter that is used to control
hij indicates the ant’s desirability to go through path from i to j
b indicates the control parameter of hij
Here, mij is the frequency of the class i in cluster j and mi is the frequency of
points in cluster I and the entropy Ep is defined as the probability sum of the
fitting of some cluster into some class
X
EP ¼ pij log pij (1.14)
i
2.9.1 Selection
In a population of some size, any feature of the population is distinguished by
a particular chromosome of the genome and each chromosome is made of
genes (generally binary). Each chromosome in the population is associated
with a certain fitness value (quantifies the optimality of the solution) which is
inherent to the problem and the task that we wish to perform with our GA. The
selection process determines which solutions are allowed to reproduce
(crossover stage) and which are not according to fitness values while main-
taining a constant population size for the solution space. This seems intuitively
valid as we endeavor to weed unoptimal (low fitness value) solutions toward
future generations (iterations) and perform crossover over solutions with high
fitness values with the hope of getting a better solution to replace some other
suboptimal solution in the population.
There are different techniques for selection like the following:
❖ Tournament selection
❖ Roulette-wheel selection
❖ Proportionate selection
❖ Rank selection, etc.
When the fitness values have sufficient difference, we may use tournament
selection, and when the fitness values are close enough, generally, roulette-
wheel selection is used.
2.9.2 Crossover
Suppose there are two chromosomes of size n for the purpose of crossover, we
select a position k such that position [1,k] is covered by the genes of the first
chromosome and the position [kþ1,n] is covered by the genes of the other to
create a new chromosome.
2.9.3 Mutation
Now any kind of mutation is used to create a new property out of our chro-
mosomes which helps to improve to the rate of convergence. Mutation can be
simply achieved by altering the bit of a specific position [13]. However, mu-
tation is a risky process as too much can bring too much randomness which
may completely disrupt our results. Likewise, applying mutation to the MSB
of the chromosome can bring drastic changes which we want to avoid.
However, mutation provided with low probability is useful.
Then, we compute the error function considering the new centroid center
Mj. The fitness function is then defined as
F ¼ 1=D (1.18)
Thereafter, we do crossover as mentioned above. Now since we are dealing
with real values for the genes, instead of flipping, we use a different procedure
for mutation [16]. Suppose, the value of a gene is x, then for some random
value m generated using uniform distribution within the range [0,1] x is
mutated (as shown in Ref. [15]) as follows
x ¼ x 2 m x when x is not 0
(1.19)
x ¼ x 2 m otherwise