DOCSLIB.ORG

A Robust Feature Selection System with Colin's CCA Network

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Neurocomputing 173 (2016) 855–863 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Neurocomputing journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom A robust feature selection system with Colin's CCA network Md Zakir Hossain a, Md. Monirul Kabir b, Md. Shahjahan a,n a Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering and Technology (KUET), Khulna 9203, Bangladesh b Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Dhaka University of Engineering and Technology (DUET), Gazipur, Bangladesh article info abstract Article history: Biomedical data such as microarray data are typified by high dimensionality and small sample size. Received 23 August 2014 Feature selection (FS) is a predominant technique to find informative features as a means of biomarker Received in revised form from this huge amount of data. However, many early studies report acquisition noise that results 3 August 2015 unreliable supposition to select features. The methods which rely on computing mutual information Accepted 19 August 2015 between features will lead to poor generalization. To the best of our knowledge very few feature zhi yong Liu Available online 2 September 2015 selection methods are proposed to address these two problems together. This paper presents a novel FS method based on Network of Canonical Correlation Analysis, NCCA, which sounds robust to acquisition Keywords: noise and ignores mutual information computation. Two strong strategies that distinguish NCCA than Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) other methods are adopted in NCCA namely ‘training with noisy features’ and ‘maximum correlation and Neural network (NN) minimum redundancies’ to address the above two problems. As a result informative feature subset is Feature selection (FS) Embedded approach converged. NCCA has been applied to different types of biomedical dataset having very high dimension Pruning with different aspects such as microarray, gene expression and voice signal. In order to get reliable results, NCCA is evaluated with two classifiers – neural network (NN) and support vector machine (SVM). The result of NCCA is very robust in terms of elapsed time, accuracy and Mean Square Error (MSE) with respect to mutual information based methods such as an information gain (IG) method. The computa- tional complexity of NCCA has been shown to be less than IG theoretically and experimentally. It is observed that NCCA is about 2–19 times faster than IG depending on the size of dataset. NCCA is further compared with other standard methods in the literature and it is found to be better than other tech- niques. & 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction but they could select features not suitable for the learning models. In embedded methods, feature selection and learning model are Huge amounts of features and on the contrary a single feature optimized simultaneously. Hybrid methods take advantage of both do not represent a problem domain completely due to the pre- filter and wrapper methods in some particular hybridization fra- sence of redundant and insufficient information. In order to get a meworks. The focus of this paper is on selecting features using representative and informative features from a problem domain, two-step special embedded scheme. feature selection methods become an important step to build fast There are two major problems encountered in feature selection and robust learning models with better generalization ability. paradigm. One is from data side and another from methodology Recent approaches for feature selection include wrapper [1,2], side. Concerning data, acquisition noise is an unavoidable pre- dominant phenomenon that automatically includes in a data col- filter [3], embedded [4], hybrid methods [5,6]. Wrapper methods lection scheme. Biological data often contain noise and artifacts involve the learning models and evaluate features directly since they are collected with a data acquisition system. Data arti- according to the learning outcome. They tend to obtain better facts typically affect more than 10% of the records in a biological learning outcome at the cost of computation effort. On the other dataset [7]. A large amount of sources of noise and artifacts are fi hand, lter methods measure the goodness of a feature based on observed such as annotation errors, attribute errors, sequence the intrinsic characteristic of the data and without any con- violation, contaminated sequence, nonspecific attributes, invalid sideration of the learning models. They are computationally fast, values etc. Although application of these data to a learning model results unreliable implication to select features, inclusion of noise n does not mean that they are unimportant. Corresponding author. Tel.: þ88 1912251993; fax: þ88 41 774403. E-mail addresses: [email protected], From methodology side, mutual information based methods [email protected] (Md. Shahjahan). such as Information gain (IG) is popularly used for selecting http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2015.08.040 0925-2312/& 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 856 M.Z. Hossain et al. / Neurocomputing 173 (2016) 855–863 criteria of attribute from a decision tree [8]. It measures the less than the smallest dimensionality of the two variables. The amount of information in bits about the class prediction with the standard statistical CCA is an extension of multiple regressions, expected reduction in entropy [9], when there is available feature where the second set contains multiple response variables. The with their corresponding class distribution. The relevance of a variables in each set are linearly combined in a low dimensional feature can be determined statistically by the highest value of IG. space such that the linear combinations have a maximal correla- Nevertheless IG requires discretization for numeric data prior to FS tion. A major target of feature selection is to improve the gen- [10]. Moreover features are selected in a greedy manner [11] by eralization ability of a classifier. A classifier cannot adopt infor- measuring the mutual dependence of two variables. It can some- mation perfectly if an input pattern becomes vigorously long times over fit training data, resulting large trees. In addition, it which is generally observed in a biomedical dataset. As a result, ignores simultaneous optimization across all features. The meth- generalization performance of the classifier degrades significantly. ods based on mutual information such as in [12] ‘‘does not always In this case, reducing of a long pattern into smaller subsets can guarantee to decrease the misclassification probability’’ [13] which significantly improve the performance of the classifier. Especially may also lead to worse classification performance. This may be due the weakness of one subset can be reduced by the strength of to consideration of noise and artifacts jointly in an FS process. others [20]. The specialty of Colin's CCA network is that it can Recursive elimination of features (Relief-F) [14] was proposed to allow more than two subsets. identify important variants according to strong interactions of data The basic definition of selecting feature subset is “strongly rele- sets. However, it is sensitive to the presence of noise in attributes. vant and weakly relevant but non-redundant features form an opti- ” Among other approaches, χ2-statistics, t-statistics, minimum mal subset of features [21].InanNCCAsystem,thisstrategywas redundancy-maximum relevance (MRMR), Effective range based prevailed by taking strongly and weakly but relevant features by gene selection (ERGS), methods are discussed briefly. The features maximizing correlation among them. The nonredundancy of weakly are selected based on the sorted values of χ2-statistic for all fea- correlated set was evident since features with heavily correlated tures. Similar to IG, each numeric attribute is discretized before weights from weak set of NCCA were selected after a maximization computing chi-square statistic. The values of t-statistic are sorted process. Weakly correlated subset is considered with highly corre- in descending order to select the important feature. Ding and Peng lated subset on the basis of the following background. Firstly,noise fi [15] proposed a minimum redundancies maximum relevance and artifacts signi cantly degrade the correlation among the relevant features. Therefore a significant amount of weakly correlated features (MRMR) technique that selects features by minimizing redun- are separated and neglected in the previous approaches although dancy among them with maximal relevance. MRMR uses mutual they seemed to be important. Secondly, it is evident that there must information criterion [16,17] as a measure of relevance for discrete have nonlinear relationship among features—which is difficult to datasets whereas F-statistic between the genes and the class isolate using linear CCA network. The overall correlation also variable is considered as the score of maximum relevance for the degrades due to the presence of nonlinear correlation. The features continuous variables. This approach requires two search algo- corresponding to these nonlinear correlations may have significant rithms to meet redundancy and relevance conditions. Effective role to classification task. There is no doubt that a large amount of range gene selection (ERGS) proposes a principle that a feature them are ignored by many previous methods although they can play should be selected if decision boundaries among classes are very significant role to improve the
Recommended publications
  • A New Wrapper Feature Selection Approach Using Neural Network

    A New Wrapper Feature Selection Approach Using Neural Network

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Community Repository of Fukui Neurocomputing 73 (2010) 3273–3283 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Neurocomputing journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom A new wrapper feature selection approach using neural network Md. Monirul Kabir a, Md. Monirul Islam b, Kazuyuki Murase c,n a Department of System Design Engineering, University of Fukui, Fukui 910-8507, Japan b Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh c Department of Human and Artificial Intelligence Systems, Graduate School of Engineering, and Research and Education Program for Life Science, University of Fukui, Fukui 910-8507, Japan article info abstract Article history: This paper presents a new feature selection (FS) algorithm based on the wrapper approach using neural Received 5 December 2008 networks (NNs). The vital aspect of this algorithm is the automatic determination of NN architectures Received in revised form during the FS process. Our algorithm uses a constructive approach involving correlation information in 9 November 2009 selecting features and determining NN architectures. We call this algorithm as constructive approach Accepted 2 April 2010 for FS (CAFS). The aim of using correlation information in CAFS is to encourage the search strategy for Communicated by M.T. Manry Available online 21 May 2010 selecting less correlated (distinct) features if they enhance accuracy of NNs. Such an encouragement will reduce redundancy of information resulting in compact NN architectures. We evaluate the Keywords: performance of CAFS on eight benchmark classification problems. The experimental results show the Feature selection essence of CAFS in selecting features with compact NN architectures.
  • ``Preconditioning'' for Feature Selection and Regression in High-Dimensional Problems

    ``Preconditioning'' for Feature Selection and Regression in High-Dimensional Problems

    The Annals of Statistics 2008, Vol. 36, No. 4, 1595–1618 DOI: 10.1214/009053607000000578 © Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2008 “PRECONDITIONING” FOR FEATURE SELECTION AND REGRESSION IN HIGH-DIMENSIONAL PROBLEMS1 BY DEBASHIS PAUL,ERIC BAIR,TREVOR HASTIE1 AND ROBERT TIBSHIRANI2 University of California, Davis, Stanford University, Stanford University and Stanford University We consider regression problems where the number of predictors greatly exceeds the number of observations. We propose a method for variable selec- tion that first estimates the regression function, yielding a “preconditioned” response variable. The primary method used for this initial regression is su- pervised principal components. Then we apply a standard procedure such as forward stepwise selection or the LASSO to the preconditioned response variable. In a number of simulated and real data examples, this two-step pro- cedure outperforms forward stepwise selection or the usual LASSO (applied directly to the raw outcome). We also show that under a certain Gaussian la- tent variable model, application of the LASSO to the preconditioned response variable is consistent as the number of predictors and observations increases. Moreover, when the observational noise is rather large, the suggested proce- dure can give a more accurate estimate than LASSO. We illustrate our method on some real problems, including survival analysis with microarray data. 1. Introduction. In this paper, we consider the problem of fitting linear (and other related) models to data for which the number of features p greatly exceeds the number of samples n. This problem occurs frequently in genomics, for exam- ple, in microarray studies in which p genes are measured on n biological samples.
  • Feature Selection Via Dependence Maximization

    Feature Selection Via Dependence Maximization

    JournalofMachineLearningResearch13(2012)1393-1434 Submitted 5/07; Revised 6/11; Published 5/12 Feature Selection via Dependence Maximization Le Song [email protected] Computational Science and Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology 266 Ferst Drive Atlanta, GA 30332, USA Alex Smola [email protected] Yahoo! Research 4301 Great America Pky Santa Clara, CA 95053, USA Arthur Gretton∗ [email protected] Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit 17 Queen Square London WC1N 3AR, UK Justin Bedo† [email protected] Statistical Machine Learning Program National ICT Australia Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia Karsten Borgwardt [email protected] Machine Learning and Computational Biology Research Group Max Planck Institutes Spemannstr. 38 72076 Tubingen,¨ Germany Editor: Aapo Hyvarinen¨ Abstract We introduce a framework for feature selection based on dependence maximization between the selected features and the labels of an estimation problem, using the Hilbert-Schmidt Independence Criterion. The key idea is that good features should be highly dependent on the labels. Our ap- proach leads to a greedy procedure for feature selection. We show that a number of existing feature selectors are special cases of this framework. Experiments on both artificial and real-world data show that our feature selector works well in practice. Keywords: kernel methods, feature selection, independence measure, Hilbert-Schmidt indepen- dence criterion, Hilbert space embedding of distribution 1. Introduction In data analysis we are typically given a set of observations X = x1,...,xm X which can be { } used for a number of tasks, such as novelty detection, low-dimensional representation,⊆ or a range of . Also at Intelligent Systems Group, Max Planck Institutes, Spemannstr.
  • Feature Selection in Convolutional Neural Network with MNIST Handwritten Digits

    Feature Selection in Convolutional Neural Network with MNIST Handwritten Digits

    Feature Selection in Convolutional Neural Network with MNIST Handwritten Digits Zhuochen Wu College of Engineering and Computer Science, Australian National University [email protected] Abstract. Feature selection is an important technique to improve neural network performances due to the redundant attributes and the massive amount in original data sets. In this paper, a CNN with two convolutional layers followed by a dropout, then two fully connected layers, is equipped with a feature selection algorithm. Accuracy rate of the networks with different attribute input weight as zero are calculated and ranked so that the machine can decide which attribute is the least important for each run of the algorithm. The algorithm repeats itself to remove multiple attributes. When the network will not achieve a satisfying accuracy rate as defined in the algorithm, the process terminates and no more attributes to be removed. A CNN is chosen the image recognition task and one dropout is applied to reduce the overfitting of training data. This implementation of deep learning method proves its ability to rise accuracy and neural network performance with up to 80% less attributes fed in. This paper also compares the technique with other the result of LeNet-5 to see the differences and common facts. Keywords: CNN, Feature selection, Classification, Real world problem, Deep learning 1. Introduction Feature selection has been a focus in many study domains like econometrics, statistics and pattern recognition. It is a process to select a subset of attributes in given data and improve the algorithm performance in efficient and accuracy, etc. It is commonly understood that the more features being fed into a neural network, the more information machine could learn from in order to achieve a better outcome.
  • Classification with Costly Features Using Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Classification with Costly Features Using Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Classification with Costly Features using Deep Reinforcement Learning Jarom´ır Janisch and Toma´sˇ Pevny´ and Viliam Lisy´ Artificial Intelligence Center, Department of Computer Science Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague jaromir.janisch, tomas.pevny, viliam.lisy @fel.cvut.cz f g Abstract y1 We study a classification problem where each feature can be y2 acquired for a cost and the goal is to optimize a trade-off be- af3 af5 af1 ac tween the expected classification error and the feature cost. We y3 revisit a former approach that has framed the problem as a se- ··· quential decision-making problem and solved it by Q-learning . with a linear approximation, where individual actions are ei- . ther requests for feature values or terminate the episode by providing a classification decision. On a set of eight problems, we demonstrate that by replacing the linear approximation Figure 1: Illustrative sequential process of classification. The with neural networks the approach becomes comparable to the agent sequentially asks for different features (actions af ) and state-of-the-art algorithms developed specifically for this prob- finally performs a classification (ac). The particular decisions lem. The approach is flexible, as it can be improved with any are influenced by the observed values. new reinforcement learning enhancement, it allows inclusion of pre-trained high-performance classifier, and unlike prior art, its performance is robust across all evaluated datasets. a different subset of features can be selected for different samples. The goal is to minimize the expected classification Introduction error, while also minimizing the expected incurred cost.
  • Feature Selection for Regression Problems

    Feature Selection for Regression Problems

    Feature Selection for Regression Problems M. Karagiannopoulos, D. Anyfantis, S. B. Kotsiantis, P. E. Pintelas unreliable data, then knowledge discovery Abstract-- Feature subset selection is the during the training phase is more difficult. In process of identifying and removing from a real-world data, the representation of data training data set as much irrelevant and often uses too many features, but only a few redundant features as possible. This reduces the of them may be related to the target concept. dimensionality of the data and may enable There may be redundancy, where certain regression algorithms to operate faster and features are correlated so that is not necessary more effectively. In some cases, correlation coefficient can be improved; in others, the result to include all of them in modelling; and is a more compact, easily interpreted interdependence, where two or more features representation of the target concept. This paper between them convey important information compares five well-known wrapper feature that is obscure if any of them is included on selection methods. Experimental results are its own. reported using four well known representative regression algorithms. Generally, features are characterized [2] as: 1. Relevant: These are features which have Index terms: supervised machine learning, an influence on the output and their role feature selection, regression models can not be assumed by the rest 2. Irrelevant: Irrelevant features are defined as those features not having any influence I. INTRODUCTION on the output, and whose values are generated at random for each example. In this paper we consider the following 3. Redundant: A redundancy exists regression setting.
  • Gaussian Universal Features, Canonical Correlations, and Common Information

    Gaussian Universal Features, Canonical Correlations, and Common Information

    Gaussian Universal Features, Canonical Correlations, and Common Information Shao-Lun Huang Gregory W. Wornell, Lizhong Zheng DSIT Research Center, TBSI, SZ, China 518055 Dept. EECS, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA Email: [email protected] Email: {gww, lizhong}@mit.edu Abstract—We address the problem of optimal feature selection we define a rotation-invariant ensemble (RIE) that assigns a for a Gaussian vector pair in the weak dependence regime, uniform prior for the unknown attributes, and formulate a when the inference task is not known in advance. In particular, universal feature selection problem that aims to select optimal we show that multiple formulations all yield the same solution, and correspond to the singular value decomposition (SVD) of features minimizing the averaged MSE over RIE. We show the canonical correlation matrix. Our results reveal key con- that the optimal features can be obtained from the SVD nections between canonical correlation analysis (CCA), principal of a canonical dependence matrix (CDM). In addition, we component analysis (PCA), the Gaussian information bottleneck, demonstrate that in a weak dependence regime, this SVD Wyner’s common information, and the Ky Fan (nuclear) norms. also provides the optimal features and solutions for several problems, such as CCA, information bottleneck, and Wyner’s common information, for jointly Gaussian variables. This I. INTRODUCTION reveals important connections between information theory and Typical applications of machine learning involve data whose machine learning problems. dimension is high relative to the amount of training data that is available. As a consequence, it is necessary to perform di- mensionality reduction before the regression or other inference II.
  • Feature Selection for Unsupervised Learning

    Feature Selection for Unsupervised Learning

    Journal of Machine Learning Research 5 (2004) 845–889 Submitted 11/2000; Published 8/04 Feature Selection for Unsupervised Learning Jennifer G. Dy [email protected] Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Northeastern University Boston, MA 02115, USA Carla E. Brodley [email protected] School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Purdue University West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA Editor: Stefan Wrobel Abstract In this paper, we identify two issues involved in developing an automated feature subset selec- tion algorithm for unlabeled data: the need for finding the number of clusters in conjunction with feature selection, and the need for normalizing the bias of feature selection criteria with respect to dimension. We explore the feature selection problem and these issues through FSSEM (Fea- ture Subset Selection using Expectation-Maximization (EM) clustering) and through two different performance criteria for evaluating candidate feature subsets: scatter separability and maximum likelihood. We present proofs on the dimensionality biases of these feature criteria, and present a cross-projection normalization scheme that can be applied to any criterion to ameliorate these bi- ases. Our experiments show the need for feature selection, the need for addressing these two issues, and the effectiveness of our proposed solutions. Keywords: clustering, feature selection, unsupervised learning, expectation-maximization 1. Introduction In this paper, we explore the issues involved in developing automated feature subset selection algo- rithms for unsupervised learning. By unsupervised learning we mean unsupervised classification, or clustering. Cluster analysis is the process of finding “natural” groupings by grouping “similar” (based on some similarity measure) objects together. For many learning domains, a human defines the features that are potentially useful.
  • Feature Selection Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Tracking Zhiyan Cui, Na Lu*

    Feature Selection Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Tracking Zhiyan Cui, Na Lu*

    1 Feature Selection Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Tracking Zhiyan Cui, Na Lu* Abstract—Most of the existing tracking methods based on such amount of data for tracking to train a deep network. CNN(convolutional neural networks) are too slow for real-time MDNet [12] is a novel solution for tracking problem with application despite the excellent tracking precision compared detection method. It is trained by learning the shared with the traditional ones. Moreover, neural networks are memory intensive which will take up lots of hardware resources. In this representations of targets from multiple video sequences, paper, a feature selection visual tracking algorithm combining where each video is regarded as a separate domain. There CNN based MDNet(Multi-Domain Network) and RoIAlign was are several branches in the last layer of the network for developed. We find that there is a lot of redundancy in feature binary classification and each of them is corresponding to maps from convolutional layers. So valid feature maps are a video sequence. The preceding layers are in charge of selected by mutual information and others are abandoned which can reduce the complexity and computation of the network and capturing common representations of targets. While tracking, do not affect the precision. The major problem of MDNet also lies the last layer is removed and a new single branch is added in the time efficiency. Considering the computational complexity to the network to compute the scores in the test sequences. of MDNet is mainly caused by the large amount of convolution Parameters in the fully-connected layers are fine-tuned online operations and fine-tuning of the network during tracking, a during tracking.
  • Feature Selection

    Feature Selection

    Feature Selection Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang and Huan Liu Arizona State University Abstract Data dimensionality is growing exponentially, which poses chal- lenges to the vast majority of existing mining and learning algorithms, such as the curse of dimensionality, large storage requirement, and high computational cost. Feature selection has been proven to be an effec- tive and efficient way to prepare high dimensional data for data mining and machine learning. The recent emergence of novel techniques and new types of data and features not only advances existing feature se- lection research but also makes feature selection evolve more rapidly, becoming applicable to a broader range of applications. In this article, we aim to provide a basic introduction to feature selection including basic concepts, classifications of existing systems, recent development, and applications. Synonyms: Feature subset selection, Feature weighting, Attributes selec- tion Definition (or Synopsis): Feature selection, as a dimensionality reduction technique, aims to choosing a small subset of the relevant features from the original ones by removing irrelevant, redundant or noisy features. Feature selection usually leads to better learning performance, i.e., higher learning accuracy, lower computational cost, and better model interpretability. Generally speaking, irrelevant features are features that cannot discrim- inate samples from different classes(supervised) or clusters(unsupervised). Removing irrelevant features will not affect learning performance. In fact, removal of irrelevant features may help learn a better model, as irrelevant features may confuse the learning system and cause memory and computa- tion inefficiency. For example, in figure 1(a), f1 is a relevant feature because f1 can discriminate class1 and class2.
  • Concrete Autoencoders

    Concrete Autoencoders

    Differentiable Feature Selection with Concrete Autoencoders Abubakar Abid★ Muhammed Fatih Balin★ James Zou Poster: Thu Jun 13th 06:30 - 09:00 PM @ Pacific Ballroom #188 Unsupervised Feature Selection (UFS) is Widely Used in Machine Learning ● Identify the subset of most informative features in dataset ● Simplifies the process of training models ● Especially useful if the data is difficult or expensive to collect Differentiable Feature Selection and Reconstruction with Concrete Autoencoders 2 Unsupervised Feature Selection (UFS) is Used Widely in Applied ML ● Example: the L1000 Landmark Genes [Lamb et al., 2006] All Genes L1000 Genes All Genes Samples Samples Samples Recons truction Feature Selection Differentiable Feature Selection and Reconstruction with Concrete Autoencoders 3 UFS Methods Typically Rely on Regularization Unsupervised Discriminative Feature Selection (UDFS) [Yang et al., 2011] Multi-Cluster Feature Selection (MCFS) All based on [Cai et al., 2010] L1 or L21 regularization Autoencoder Feature Selection (AEFS) [Han et al., 2017] Differentiable Feature Selection and Reconstruction with Concrete Autoencoders 4 What about directly backpropagating through discrete “feature selection” nodes? Differentiable Feature Selection and Reconstruction with Concrete Autoencoders 5 What about directly backpropagating through discrete “feature selection” nodes? Replace the weights of the encoder with parameters of a Concrete Random Variable (Maddison, 2016) Differentiable Feature Selection and Reconstruction with Concrete Autoencoders 6
  • A Comparative Study on the Effect of Feature Selection on Classification Accuracy

    A Comparative Study on the Effect of Feature Selection on Classification Accuracy

    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Technology 1 ( 2012 ) 323 – 327 INSODE 2011 A comparative study on the effect of feature selection on classification accuracy Esra Mahsereci Karabuluta*, Selma Ayşe Özelb, Turgay İbrikçib,c a Gaziantep University, Gaziantep Vocational High School, Şehitkamil/Gaziantep, 27310, Turkey b Çukurova University, Electrical-Electronics Engineering Department, Balcalı/Adana, 01330, Turkey c Çukurova University,Computer Engineering Department, Balcalı/Adana, 01330, Turkey Abstract Feature selection has become interest to many research areas which deal with machine learning and data mining, because it provides the classifiers to be fast, cost-effective, and more accurate. In this paper the effect of feature selection on the accuracy of NaïveBayes, Artificial Neural Network as Multilayer Perceptron, and J48 decision tree classifiers is presented. These classifiers are compared with fifteen real datasets which are pre-processed with feature selection methods. Up to 15.55% improvement in classification accuracy is observed, and Multilayer Perceptron appears to be the most sensitive classifier to feature selection. Keywords: feature selection; classification; accuracy; Naïve Bayes; multilayer perceptron 1. Introduction Feature selection is the process of removing redundant or irrelevant features from the original data set. So the execution time of the classifier that processes the data reduces, also accuracy increases because irrelevant features can include noisy data affecting the classification accuracy negatively [1]. With feature selection the understandability can be improved and cost of data handling becomes smaller [2]. Feature selection algorithms are divided into three categories; filters, wrappers and embedded selectors. Filters evaluate each feature independent from the classifier, rank the features after evaluation and take the superior ones [3].