Skip to main content
Log in

Kernel selection with spectral perturbation stability of kernel matrix

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Kernel selection is one of the key issues both in recent research and application of kernel methods. This is usually done by minimizing either an estimate of generalization error or some other related performance measure. Use of notions of stability to estimate the generalization error has attracted much attention in recent years. Unfortunately, the existing notions of stability, proposed to derive the theoretical generalization error bounds, are difficult to be used for kernel selection in practice. It is well known that the kernel matrix contains most of the information needed by kernel methods, and the eigenvalues play an important role in the kernel matrix. Therefore, we aim at introducing a new notion of stability, called the spectral perturbation stability, to study the kernel selection problem. This proposed stability quantifies the spectral perturbation of the kernel matrix with respect to the changes in the training set. We establish the connection between the spectral perturbation stability and the generalization error. By minimizing the derived generalization error bound, we propose a new kernel selection criterion that can guarantee good generalization properties. In our criterion, the perturbation of the eigenvalues of the kernel matrix is efficiently computed by solving the derivative of a newly defined generalized kernel matrix. Both theoretical analysis and experimental results demonstrate that our criterion is sound and effective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vapnik V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. New York: Springer, 2000

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Xu C, Peng Z M, Jing W F. Sparse kernel logistic regression based on 1/2 regularization. Sci China Inf Sci, 2013, 56: 042308

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Chapelle O, Vapnik V, Bousquet O, et al. Choosing multiple parameters for support vector machines. Mach Learn, 2002, 46: 131–159

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Xu Z B, Dai M, Meng D Y. Fast and efficient strategies for model selection of Gaussian support vector machine. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern, 2009, 39: 1292–1307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li G Z, Zhao R W, Qu H N, et al. Model selection for partial least squares based dimension reduction. Pattern Recognit Lett, 2012, 33: 524–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bartlett P, Mendelson S. Rademacher and Gaussian complexities: Risk bounds and structural results. J Mach Learn Res, 2002, 3: 463–482

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang T. Covering number bounds of certain regularized linear function classes. J Mach Learn Res, 2002, 2: 527–550

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Zou B, Peng Z M, Xu Z B. The learning performance of support vector machine classification based on markov sampling. Sci China Inf Sci, 2013, 56: 032110

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Schölkopf B, Smola A. Learning with Kernels. London: MIT Press, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  10. Luxburg U, Bousquet O, Schölkopf B. A compression approach to support vector model selection. J Mach Learn Res, 2004, 5: 293–323

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu Y, Jiang S L, Liao S Z. Eigenvalues perturbation of integral operator for kernel selection. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, San Francisco, 2013. 2189–2198

    Google Scholar 

  12. Liu Y, Liao S Z, Hou Y X. Learning kernels with upper bounds of leave-one-out error. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Glasgow, 2011. 2205–2208

    Google Scholar 

  13. Debruyne M, Hubert M, Suykens J. Model selection in kernel based regression using the influence function. J Mach Learn Res, 2008, 9: 2377–2400

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu Y, Jiang S L, Liao S Z. Efficient approximation of cross-validation for kernel methods using Bouligand influence function. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Machine Learning, Beijing, 2014. 324–332

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ding L Z, Liao S Z. Nyström approximate model selection for LSSVM. In: Proceedings of the 16th Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Kuala Lumpur, 2012. 282–293

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ding L Z, Liao S Z. Approximate model selection for large scale LSSVM. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Asian Conference on Machine Learning, Taoyuan, 2011. 165–180

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J, Elisseeff A, et al. On kernel-target alignment. In: Proceedings of 2001 Neural Information Processing Systems Conference, Vancouver, 2001. 367–373

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cortes C, Mohri M, Rostamizadeh A. Two-stage learning kernel algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning, Haifa, 2010. 239–246

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nguyen C H, Ho T B. An efficient kernel matrix evaluation measure. Pattern Recognit, 2008, 41: 3366–3372

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Rogers W, Wagner T. A finite sample distribution-free performance bound for local discrimination rules. Ann Stat, 1978, 6: 506–514

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Kearns M, Ron D. Algorithmic stability and sanity-check bounds for leave-one-out cross-validation. Neural Comput, 1999, 11: 1472–1453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bousquet O, Elisseeff A. Stability and generalization. J Mach Learn Res, 2002, 2: 499–526

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Kutin S, Niyogi P. Almost-everywhere algorithmic stability and generalization error. In: Proceedings of the 18th Conference in Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Alberta, 2002. 275–282

    Google Scholar 

  24. Poggio T, Rifkin R, Mukherjee S, et al. General conditions for predictivity in learning theory. Nature, 2004, 428: 419–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cortes C, Mohri M, Pechyony D, et al. Stability of transductive regression algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, 2008. 176–183

    Google Scholar 

  26. Shalev-Shwartz S, Shamir O, Srebro N, et al. Learnability, stability and uniform convergence. J Mach Learn Res, 2010, 11: 2635–2670

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Cortes C, Mohri M, Talwalkar A. On the impact of kernel approximation on learning accuracy. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Sardinia, 2010. 113–120

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jiang Y, Ren J T. Eigenvalue sensitive feature selection. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning, Washington, 2011. 89–96

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nguyen C H, Ho T B. Kernel matrix evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artifficial Intelligence, Hyderabad, 2007. 987–992

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ShiZhong Liao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, Y., Liao, S. Kernel selection with spectral perturbation stability of kernel matrix. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 57, 1–10 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-014-5090-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-014-5090-z

Keywords

Navigation