In this paper, sixty-eight research articles published between 2000 and 2017 as well as textbooks which employed four classification algorithms: K-Nearest-Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forest (...In this paper, sixty-eight research articles published between 2000 and 2017 as well as textbooks which employed four classification algorithms: K-Nearest-Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forest (RF) and Neural Network (NN) as the main statistical tools were reviewed. The aim was to examine and compare these nonparametric classification methods on the following attributes: robustness to training data, sensitivity to changes, data fitting, stability, ability to handle large data sizes, sensitivity to noise, time invested in parameter tuning, and accuracy. The performances, strengths and shortcomings of each of the algorithms were examined, and finally, a conclusion was arrived at on which one has higher performance. It was evident from the literature reviewed that RF is too sensitive to small changes in the training dataset and is occasionally unstable and tends to overfit in the model. KNN is easy to implement and understand but has a major drawback of becoming significantly slow as the size of the data in use grows, while the ideal value of K for the KNN classifier is difficult to set. SVM and RF are insensitive to noise or overtraining, which shows their ability in dealing with unbalanced data. Larger input datasets will lengthen classification times for NN and KNN more than for SVM and RF. Among these nonparametric classification methods, NN has the potential to become a more widely used classification algorithm, but because of their time-consuming parameter tuning procedure, high level of complexity in computational processing, the numerous types of NN architectures to choose from and the high number of algorithms used for training, most researchers recommend SVM and RF as easier and wieldy used methods which repeatedly achieve results with high accuracies and are often faster to implement.展开更多
在定位请求服务中,如何保护用户的位置隐私和位置服务提供商(Localization service provider,LSP)的数据隐私是关系到WiFi指纹定位应用的一个具有挑战性的问题。基于密文域的K-近邻(K-nearest neighbors,KNN)检索,本文提出了一种适用于...在定位请求服务中,如何保护用户的位置隐私和位置服务提供商(Localization service provider,LSP)的数据隐私是关系到WiFi指纹定位应用的一个具有挑战性的问题。基于密文域的K-近邻(K-nearest neighbors,KNN)检索,本文提出了一种适用于三方的定位隐私保护算法,能有效提升对LSP指纹信息隐私的保护强度并降低计算开销。服务器和用户分别完成对指纹信息和定位请求的加密,而第三方则基于加密指纹库和加密定位请求,在隐私状态下完成对用户的位置估计。所提算法把各参考点的位置信息随机嵌入指纹,可避免恶意用户获取各参考点的具体位置;进一步利用布隆滤波器在隐藏接入点信息的情况下,第三方可完成参考点的在线匹配,实现对用户隐私状态下的粗定位,可与定位算法结合降低计算开销。在公共数据集和实验室数据集中,对两种算法的安全、开销和定位性能进行了全面的评估。与同类加密算法比较,在不降低定位精度的情况下,进一步增强了对数据隐私的保护。展开更多
文摘In this paper, sixty-eight research articles published between 2000 and 2017 as well as textbooks which employed four classification algorithms: K-Nearest-Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forest (RF) and Neural Network (NN) as the main statistical tools were reviewed. The aim was to examine and compare these nonparametric classification methods on the following attributes: robustness to training data, sensitivity to changes, data fitting, stability, ability to handle large data sizes, sensitivity to noise, time invested in parameter tuning, and accuracy. The performances, strengths and shortcomings of each of the algorithms were examined, and finally, a conclusion was arrived at on which one has higher performance. It was evident from the literature reviewed that RF is too sensitive to small changes in the training dataset and is occasionally unstable and tends to overfit in the model. KNN is easy to implement and understand but has a major drawback of becoming significantly slow as the size of the data in use grows, while the ideal value of K for the KNN classifier is difficult to set. SVM and RF are insensitive to noise or overtraining, which shows their ability in dealing with unbalanced data. Larger input datasets will lengthen classification times for NN and KNN more than for SVM and RF. Among these nonparametric classification methods, NN has the potential to become a more widely used classification algorithm, but because of their time-consuming parameter tuning procedure, high level of complexity in computational processing, the numerous types of NN architectures to choose from and the high number of algorithms used for training, most researchers recommend SVM and RF as easier and wieldy used methods which repeatedly achieve results with high accuracies and are often faster to implement.
文摘在定位请求服务中,如何保护用户的位置隐私和位置服务提供商(Localization service provider,LSP)的数据隐私是关系到WiFi指纹定位应用的一个具有挑战性的问题。基于密文域的K-近邻(K-nearest neighbors,KNN)检索,本文提出了一种适用于三方的定位隐私保护算法,能有效提升对LSP指纹信息隐私的保护强度并降低计算开销。服务器和用户分别完成对指纹信息和定位请求的加密,而第三方则基于加密指纹库和加密定位请求,在隐私状态下完成对用户的位置估计。所提算法把各参考点的位置信息随机嵌入指纹,可避免恶意用户获取各参考点的具体位置;进一步利用布隆滤波器在隐藏接入点信息的情况下,第三方可完成参考点的在线匹配,实现对用户隐私状态下的粗定位,可与定位算法结合降低计算开销。在公共数据集和实验室数据集中,对两种算法的安全、开销和定位性能进行了全面的评估。与同类加密算法比较,在不降低定位精度的情况下,进一步增强了对数据隐私的保护。
