Skip to main content
Log in

Perceptron Learning Revisited: The Sonar Targets Problem

  • Published:
Neural Processing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently it was pointed out that a well-known benchmark data set, the sonar target data, indeed is linearly separable. This fact comes somewhat surprising, since earlier studies involving delta rule trained perceptrons did not achieve the separation of the training data. These results immediately raise the question of why a perceptron with a continuous activation function may fail to recognize linear separability and how to remedy this failure. The study of these issues directly leads to a performance comparison of a wide variety of different perceptron training procedures on real world data.

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. Bouten, M., Schietse, J. and Van den Broeck, C.: Gradient descent learning in perceptrons: A review of its possibilities, Physical Review E 52 (1995), 1958–1967.

    Google Scholar 

  2. CMU Neural Networks Benchmark Collection, Sonar, mines vs. rocks, available from ftp://ftp.cs.cmu/afs/cs/project/connect/bench/, 1988.

  3. Cortes, C. and Vapnik, V.: Support-vector networks, Machine Learning 20 (1995), 273–297.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fahlman, S. E.: Faster learning variations on backpropagation: An empirical study, In: D. Touretzky, G. Hinton and T. Sejnowski (eds), Proc. of the 1988 Connectionist Summer School, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1989, pp. 38–51.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gorman, R. P. and Sejnowski, T. J.: Analysis of hidden units in a layered network trained to classify sonar targets, Neural Networks 1 (1988), 75–89.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Minsky, M. and Papert, S.: Perceptrons, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Riedmiller, M. and Braun, H.: A direct adaptive method for faster backpropagation learning: the RPROP algorithm, In: Proc. of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1993, pp. 586–591.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rosenblatt, F.: The perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain, Psychological Review 65 (1958), 386–408.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ruján, P.: Playing billiards in version space, Neural Computation 9 (1997), 99–122.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Solla, S. A., Levin, E. and Fleisher, M.: Accelerated learning in layered neural networks, Complex Systems 2 (1988), 625–640.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Torres Moreno, J. M. and Gordon, M. B.: Characterization of the sonar signals benchmark, Neural Processing Letters 7 (1998), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Watkin, T. L. H.: Optimal learning with a neural network, Europhysics Letters 21 (1993), 871–876.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Widrow, B. and Lehr, M. A.: 30 years of adaptive neural networks: Perceptron, madaline and backpropagation, Proc. IEEE 78 (1990), 1415–1442.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martina Hasenjäger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hasenjäger, M., Ritter, H. Perceptron Learning Revisited: The Sonar Targets Problem. Neural Processing Letters 10, 17–24 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018654611986

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018654611986

Navigation