Skip to main content
. 2013 May 28;4:1910. doi: 10.1038/ncomms2908

Figure 3. KNN classifier for the automatic labelling of data.

Figure 3

(a) Flowchart depicting development of the classifier (top) and its use to classify data (bottom) (see also Supplementary Methods). (b) Examples of movie frames used to hand-score behaviour for training the classifier. (c) Contingency matrix of the hand-scored movie-frame data sets from the two researchers. Shade of grey indicates the abundances of (dis)agreement between the two researchers. Colours here and in e and f indicate behaviour types. Black numbers at right and bottom, respectively, indicate the false-negative and false-positive rates (%) for each behavioural category with respect to the JK manual scoring. Grey numbers indicate the total number of frames manually annotated with each behaviour. (d) Including higher-order features with the raw data increases the classifier’s accuracy (accuracy was measured as the total fraction of frames scored correctly, that is, the unbalanced accuracy; see Supplementary Methods). Behaviours such as forward/backward running and complex motion are qualitatively contiguous; the ‘plausible’ accuracy metric ignores errors between such pairs of behaviours (see text). Cross-validated error bars are ±s.e.m. calculated across n=5 flies. (e) Contingency matrix of the JK hand-scored data set to the classifier trained on the JK-scored data set. Numbers as in c. (f) Sequences of behaviour scores from both JK and BD manual data sets and from the classifier for the same 120-s window (top). Magnification of a ~8-sec subset along with the raw data used by the classifier (bottom).

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure