Reply to: Comments on "design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks"

Mansur R. Kabuka

doi:10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439

Reply to: Comments on "design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks"

Mansur R. Kabuka

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

In his comments, Guy Smith discussed three points he believes are either not correct or unclear. These points are: 1) The uniqueness of thermometer coding in the algorithm is not supported in the paper. 2) The BKNN algorithm is not equivalent to the k-nearest neighbor algorithm. 3) The relationship between examplars and classes is not clear. Following is a reply to each of the above three points:

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	957-958
Number of pages	2
Journal	IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Volume	21
Issue number	9
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439
State	Published - Dec 1 1999
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Software
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Computational Theory and Mathematics
Artificial Intelligence
Applied Mathematics

Access to Document

10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to: Comments on "design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Kabuka, M. R. (1999). Reply to: Comments on "design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 21(9), 957-958. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439

@article{3d4ebae78ead426987ea23f83c824d44,

title = "Reply to: Comments on {"}design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks{"}",

abstract = "In his comments, Guy Smith discussed three points he believes are either not correct or unclear. These points are: 1) The uniqueness of thermometer coding in the algorithm is not supported in the paper. 2) The BKNN algorithm is not equivalent to the k-nearest neighbor algorithm. 3) The relationship between examplars and classes is not clear. Following is a reply to each of the above three points:",

author = "Kabuka, {Mansur R.}",

year = "1999",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "21",

pages = "957--958",

journal = "IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence",

issn = "0162-8828",

publisher = "IEEE Computer Society",

number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reply to

T2 - Comments on "design of supervised classifiers using boolean neural networks"

AU - Kabuka, Mansur R.

PY - 1999/12/1

Y1 - 1999/12/1

N2 - In his comments, Guy Smith discussed three points he believes are either not correct or unclear. These points are: 1) The uniqueness of thermometer coding in the algorithm is not supported in the paper. 2) The BKNN algorithm is not equivalent to the k-nearest neighbor algorithm. 3) The relationship between examplars and classes is not clear. Following is a reply to each of the above three points:

AB - In his comments, Guy Smith discussed three points he believes are either not correct or unclear. These points are: 1) The uniqueness of thermometer coding in the algorithm is not supported in the paper. 2) The BKNN algorithm is not equivalent to the k-nearest neighbor algorithm. 3) The relationship between examplars and classes is not clear. Following is a reply to each of the above three points:

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33747515985&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33747515985&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439

DO - 10.1109/TPAMI.1999.790439

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33747515985

VL - 21

SP - 957

EP - 958

JO - IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

JF - IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

SN - 0162-8828

IS - 9

ER -