Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!shelby!csli!chrisley
From: chrisley@csli.Stanford.EDU (Ron Chrisley)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets
Subject: Re: Summary (long): pattern-recognition comparisons
Message-ID: <14756@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 1 Aug 90 18:47:53 GMT
References: <23979@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Sender: chrisley@csli.Stanford.EDU (Ron Chrisley)
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Lines: 28

Another reference:

We compared Kohonen's LVQ and LVQ2 to kNN and Parametric Bayes classifiers in
our 1988 paper "Statistical Pettern Recognition with Neural Networks:
Benchmarking Studies" at ICNN.  In it, we found the following results:

Task		P. Bayes	kNN		LVQ	LVQ2

Test1		12.1		12.0		10.2	9.8

Test2		13.8		12.1		13.2	12.0

The numbers are error percentages.  The tests were real speech data (15 
dimensional inputs, 1550 samples).  Error rates are for performance on test
data, not training data!

We also made comparisons against other nnets (BP and Boltmann Machines), and
found that as the dimesionality of the task got larger, and as the tasks got
more difficult (less deterministic), LVQ did better than BP, but not as good as
BM, which was expensive in terms of time and resources.

Hope this is of interest/use.

-- 
Ron Chrisley    chrisley@csli.stanford.edu
Xerox PARC SSL                               New College
Palo Alto, CA 94304                          Oxford OX1 3BN, UK
(415) 494-4728                               (865) 793-484