4.7 Article

Twin support vector quantile regression

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 237, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121239

关键词

Twin support vector regression; Quantile regression; Heterogeneity; Asymmetry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a twin support vector quantile regression (TSVQR) method to capture the heterogeneous and asymmetric information in modern data. TSVQR effectively depicts the heterogeneous distribution information with respect to all portions of data points using a quantile parameter. The method constructs two smaller sized quadratic programming problems to measure the distributional asymmetry between the lower and upper bounds at each quantile level. Experimental results show that TSVQR outperforms previous quantile regression methods in terms of capturing heterogeneous and asymmetric information effectively and efficiently in various datasets.
We propose a twin support vector quantile regression (TSVQR) to capture the heterogeneous and asymmetric information in modern data. Using a quantile parameter, TSVQR effectively depicts the heterogeneous distribution information with respect to all portions of data points. Correspondingly, TSVQR constructs two smaller sized quadratic programming problems (QPPs) to generate two nonparallel planes to measure the distributional asymmetry between the lower and upper bounds at each quantile level. The QPPs in TSVQR are smaller and easier to solve than those in previous quantile regression methods. Moreover, the dual coordinate descent algorithm for TSVQR also accelerates the training speed. Experimental results on six artificial data sets, five benchmark data sets, two large scale data sets, two time-series data sets, and two imbalanced data sets indicate that the TSVQR outperforms previous quantile regression methods in terms of the effectiveness of completely capturing the heterogeneous and asymmetric information and the efficiency of the learning process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据