Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The use of time stamps in handling latency and concept drift in online learning

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Evolving Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online classification learners operating under concept drift can be subject to latency in example arrival at the training base. The impact of such latency on the definition of a time stamp is discussed against the background of the online learning life cycle. Data stream latency is modeled in an example life-cycle integrated simulation environment. Two new algorithms are presented: CDTC versions 1 and 2, in which a specific time stamp protocol is used representing the time of classification. Comparison of these algorithms against previous time stamp learning algorithms CD3 and CD5 is made. A time stamp definition and algorithmic solution is presented for handling latency in data streams and improving classification recovery in such affected domains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angelov P, Lughofer E, Zhou X (2008) Evolving fuzzy classifiers with different architectures. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:3160–3182

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bifet A, Holmes G, Pfahringer B (2010) Leveraging bagging for evolving data streams. ECML/PKDD 2010:135–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Black M, Hickey RJ (1999) Maintaining the performance of a learned classifier under concept drift. Intell Data Anal 3:453–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouchachia A (2009) Incremental induction of classification fuzzy rules, IEEE Workshop on Evolving and Self-Developing Intelligent Systems (ESDIS) 2009, Nashville, USA, pp 32–39

  • Elwell R, Polikar R (2011) Incremental learning of concept drift in nonstationary environments. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 22(10):1517–1531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gama J (2010) Knowledge discovery from data streams. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gao J, Fan W and Han J (2007) On appropriate assumptions to mine data streams: analysis and practice. In: Proc. ICDM, 143–152

  • Hickey RJ (2012) AutoUniv, http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/AutoUniv

  • Bacardit, J. Krasnogor, N., 2008, “The Infobiotics PSP benchmarks repository”, http://www.infobiotic.net/PSPbenchmarks

  • Klinkenberg R (2004) Learning drifting concepts: example selection vs. example weighting. Intell Data Anal 8(3):281–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolter JZ, Maloof MA (2007) Dynamic weighted majority: an ensemble method for drifting concepts. J Mach Learn Res 8:2755–2790

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kurlej B, Woźniak M (2011) Learning curve in concept drift while using active learning paradigm. Bouchachia A (ed) ICAIS 2011, LNAI 6943, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 98–106

  • Lughofer E, Angelov P (2011) Handling drifts and shifts in on-line data streams with evolving fuzzy systems. Appl Soft Comput 11:2057–2068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marrs GR, Hickey RJ, Black MM (2010) Impact of latency on online classification learning with concept drift. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on knowledge science, engineering and management, LNAI, Springer, Berlin, pp 459–469

  • Marrs GR, Hickey RJ, Black MM (2010) Modeling the example life-cycle in an online classification learner. In: Online Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on handling concept drift in adaptive information systems: importance, challenges and solutions, HaCDAIS, ECML/PKDD, pp 57–64

  • Minku LL, White AP and Yao X (2009) The impact of diversity on online ensemble learning in the presence of concept drift. IEEE Transac Knowl Data Eng 99(1):730–742

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock A, Yiapanis P, Singer J, Luján M, Brown G (2010) Online non-stationary boosting. In: Multiple classifier systems, LNCS, vol 5997/2010, Springer, Berlin, pp 205–214

  • Quinlan JR (1986) Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn 1:81–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo

  • Quinlan R (2003) Data mining tools See5 and C5.0, http://www.rulequest.com

  • Sobhani P, Beigy H (2011) New drift detection method for data streams. Bouchachia A (ed) ICAIS 2011, LNAI 6943, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 88–97

  • Tsymbal A (2004) The problem of concept drift: definitions and related work. Technical Report TCD-CS-2004-15, Computer Science Department, Trinity College Dublin

  • Wang H, Yin J, Pei J, Yu P and Yu J (2006) Suppressing model over-fitting in mining concept-drifting data streams. In: Proceedings of the KDD, Philadelphia, pp 736–741

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Ulster, County Londonderry, Northern Ireland, UK

    G. R. Marrs, M. M. Black & R. J. Hickey

Authors
  1. G. R. Marrs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. M. Black
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. J. Hickey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. R. Marrs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marrs, G.R., Black, M.M. & Hickey, R.J. The use of time stamps in handling latency and concept drift in online learning. Evolving Systems 3, 203–220 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12530-012-9055-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12530-012-9055-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation