• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Classifying Portable Electronic Devices using Device Specifications : A Comparison of Machine Learning Techniques

Westerholm, Ludvig January 2024 (has links)
In this project, we explored the usage of machine learning in classifying portable electronic devices. The primary objective was to identify devices such as laptops, smartphones, and tablets, based on their physical and technical specification. These specifications, sourced from the Pricerunner price comparison website, contain height, Wi-Fi standard, and screen resolution. We aggregated this information into a dataset and split it into a training set and a testing set. To achieve the classification of devices, we trained four popular machine learning models: Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR), k-Nearest Neighbor (kNN), and Fully Connected Network (FCN). We then compared the performance of these models. The evaluation metrics used to compare performance included precision, recall, F1-score, accuracy, and training time. The RF model achieved the highest overall accuracy of 95.4% on the original dataset. The FCN, applied to a dataset processed with standardization followed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA), reached an accuracy of 92.7%, the best within this specific subset. LR excelled in a few class-specific metrics, while kNN performed notably well relative to its training time. The RF model was the clear winner on the original dataset, while the kNN model was a strong contender on the PCA-processed dataset due to its significantly faster training time compared to the FCN. In conclusion, the RF was the best-performing model on the original dataset, the FCN showed impressive results on the standardized and PCA-processed dataset, and the kNN model, with its highest macro precision and rapid training time, also demonstrated competitive performance.

Page generated in 0.0878 seconds