Aim: The suggested goal consists of analyze handwriting alphabet recognition employing Ridge Linear classification as opposed to Random Forest. Materials and Methods: The chosen dataset, which is divided into 80 and 20%, is used for the analysis. Twenty % of the data is used for testing procedures, while 80% is used for training. Two different models like Ridge Linear classifier and Random Forest were developed this time phase, and experimental analysis is carried out. To compute SPSS, a G power of 0.95 is utilized. Result: The mean accuracy of the Ridge Linear classification method, which is the recommended approach, is 93%, which is greater than the 87.42% of the conventional method. The obtained results show that there is no statistical significance difference between the Novel Ridge Linear and Random Forest with p = 0.144 (test on an independent sample, 0.05). Conclusion: The proposed algorithm performed better than the conventional method of Handwritten Alphabet Recognition.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Analysis of Random Forest Compared to Ridge Linear Classification for Handwritten Alphabet Recognition

  • J. Prakash,
  • P. Dass

摘要

Aim: The suggested goal consists of analyze handwriting alphabet recognition employing Ridge Linear classification as opposed to Random Forest. Materials and Methods: The chosen dataset, which is divided into 80 and 20%, is used for the analysis. Twenty % of the data is used for testing procedures, while 80% is used for training. Two different models like Ridge Linear classifier and Random Forest were developed this time phase, and experimental analysis is carried out. To compute SPSS, a G power of 0.95 is utilized. Result: The mean accuracy of the Ridge Linear classification method, which is the recommended approach, is 93%, which is greater than the 87.42% of the conventional method. The obtained results show that there is no statistical significance difference between the Novel Ridge Linear and Random Forest with p = 0.144 (test on an independent sample, 0.05). Conclusion: The proposed algorithm performed better than the conventional method of Handwritten Alphabet Recognition.