The Altair Community is migrating to a new platform to provide a better experience for you. The RapidMiner Community will merge with the Altair Community at the same time. In preparation for the migration, both communities are on read-only mode from July 15th - July 24th, 2024. Technical support via cases will continue to work as is. For any urgent requests from Students/Faculty members, please submit the form linked here.

combine forward with backward selection?

Fred12Fred12 Member Posts: 344 Unicorn
edited November 2018 in Help


is it somehow possible to combine forward and backward selection in an iterative manner? Like doing 2-3 times forward selection, then do 1 backward elimination, do this again several times in a loop, until the moving average performance will not improve anymore in a certain range, like "without increase of at least...%". Then this would be the stopping criterion, is there anything like that in rapidminer?


And would it be possible to compose this function with the already present operators in Rapidminer, or do I need to do this programatically?


  • Options
    Thomas_OttThomas_Ott RapidMiner Certified Analyst, RapidMiner Certified Expert, Member Posts: 1,761 Unicorn

    I'm not sure if this is a good idea and if it's even feasible. In simplistic terms, with BE you start with all the attributes and then remove the ones that increase performance. With FS you start with one attribute and add more as the performance increases. I think a BE and FS type of setup would defeat the whole purpose of their feature selection startegies. 

  • Options
    Fred12Fred12 Member Posts: 344 Unicorn

    but could it not be, that if you alternate between e.g 5x backward elimination and then 3x forward elimination, you surpass the greedy algorithm where you can get stuck in local optima and ignore possible global optima or better combinations of features that would result otherwise?

    if you remove 5 features and then do FW Selection, is it always the case that you will add the same 5 features that you removed previously? or is there a new combination with better performance possible?

Sign In or Register to comment.