{"title":"通过与随机森林算法的比较,利用支持向量机计算设备故障概率,提高准确率","authors":"Degala Lokesh, Femila Roseline J","doi":"10.1109/ICECONF57129.2023.10083595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The main purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two methods for predicting a device's failure: the Innovative Support Vector Machine (SVM) and the Random Forest (RF). Materials and Methods: From the Kaggle dataset, 800 samples of device failures were collected. These samples were split into two groups: 560 for training (70%) and 240 for testing (30%). To determine the performance of the SVM algorithm, accuracy, precision, and specificity values were calculated.Results:Based on the overall performance analysis of independent samples t-test on the two groups, the SVM algorithm achieved accuracy, precision, and specificity of 86.6%, 96.20%, and 83.5%, respectively, compared to 78.40%, 77.68%, and 95.60% for the RF algorithm. These models were significant (p 0.05), and G power was found to be 0.8.Conclusion: In this study, the SVM algorithm outperforms the RF algorithm in detecting probability device failure.","PeriodicalId":436733,"journal":{"name":"2023 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Discovery in Concurrent Engineering (ICECONF)","volume":"158 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probability of a Device Failure using Support Vector Machine by comparing with Random Forest Algorithm to improve the accuracy\",\"authors\":\"Degala Lokesh, Femila Roseline J\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICECONF57129.2023.10083595\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The main purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two methods for predicting a device's failure: the Innovative Support Vector Machine (SVM) and the Random Forest (RF). Materials and Methods: From the Kaggle dataset, 800 samples of device failures were collected. These samples were split into two groups: 560 for training (70%) and 240 for testing (30%). To determine the performance of the SVM algorithm, accuracy, precision, and specificity values were calculated.Results:Based on the overall performance analysis of independent samples t-test on the two groups, the SVM algorithm achieved accuracy, precision, and specificity of 86.6%, 96.20%, and 83.5%, respectively, compared to 78.40%, 77.68%, and 95.60% for the RF algorithm. These models were significant (p 0.05), and G power was found to be 0.8.Conclusion: In this study, the SVM algorithm outperforms the RF algorithm in detecting probability device failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":436733,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2023 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Discovery in Concurrent Engineering (ICECONF)\",\"volume\":\"158 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2023 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Discovery in Concurrent Engineering (ICECONF)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECONF57129.2023.10083595\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Discovery in Concurrent Engineering (ICECONF)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECONF57129.2023.10083595","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Probability of a Device Failure using Support Vector Machine by comparing with Random Forest Algorithm to improve the accuracy
Aim: The main purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two methods for predicting a device's failure: the Innovative Support Vector Machine (SVM) and the Random Forest (RF). Materials and Methods: From the Kaggle dataset, 800 samples of device failures were collected. These samples were split into two groups: 560 for training (70%) and 240 for testing (30%). To determine the performance of the SVM algorithm, accuracy, precision, and specificity values were calculated.Results:Based on the overall performance analysis of independent samples t-test on the two groups, the SVM algorithm achieved accuracy, precision, and specificity of 86.6%, 96.20%, and 83.5%, respectively, compared to 78.40%, 77.68%, and 95.60% for the RF algorithm. These models were significant (p 0.05), and G power was found to be 0.8.Conclusion: In this study, the SVM algorithm outperforms the RF algorithm in detecting probability device failure.