Abstract
In concept learning and data mining tasks, the learner is typically faced with a choice of many possible hypotheses or patterns characterizing the input data. If one can assume that training data contain no noise, then the primary conditions a hypothesis must satisfy are consistency and completeness with regard to the data. In real-world applications, however, data are often noisy, and the insistence on the full completeness and consistency of the hypothesis is no longer valid. In such situations, the problem is to determine a hypothesis that represents the best trade-off between completeness and consistency. This paper presents an approach to this problem in which a learner seeks rules optimizing a rule quality criterion that combines the rule coverage (a measure of completeness) and training accuracy (a measure of inconsistency). These factors are combined into a single rule quality measure through a lexicographical evaluation functional (LEF). The method has been implemented in the AQ18 learning system for natural induction and pattern discovery, and compared with several other methods. Experiments have shown that the proposed method can be easily tailored to different problems and can simulate different rule learners by modifying the parameter of the rule quality criterion.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baim, P.W. (1982). The PROMISE Method for Selecting Most Relevant Attributes for Inductive Learning Systems. Report No. UIUCDCS-F-82–898, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois, Urbana.
Bergadano, F., Matwin, S., Michalski, R.S., and Zhang, J. (1992). Learning Two-Tiered Descriptions of Flexible Concepts: The POSEIDON System, Machine Learning, 8, 5–43.
Bruha, I. (1997). Quality of Decision Rules: Definitions and Classification Schemes for Multiple Rules. In G. Nakhaeizadeh and C.C. Taylor (Eds.), Machine Learning and Statistics, The Interface (pp. 107–131). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Clark, P. and Boswell, R. (1991). Rule Induction with CN2: Some Recent Improvements. In Y. Kodratoff (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth European Working Session on Learning (EWSL-91) (pp. 151–163). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Clark, P. and Niblett, T. (1989). The CN2 Induction Algorithm, Machine Learning, 3, 261–283.
Cohen, W. (1995). Fast Effective Rule Induction. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Machine Learning, Lake Tahoe, CA.
Fayyad, U.M., Piatetsky-Shapiro, G., Smyth, P., and Uthurusamy, R. (Eds.) (1996). Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Fürnkranz, J. and Widmer, G. (1994). Incremental Reduced Error Pruning. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, NJ.
Kaufman, K.A. (1997). INLEN: A Methodology and Integrated System for Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Ph.D. Dissertation. Reports of the Machine Learning and Inference Laboratory, MLI 97–15, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Kaufman, K.A. and Michalski, R.S. (to appear). STAR: An Environment for Natural Induction and Learning. Reports of the Machine Learning and Inference Laboratory, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
Michalski, R.S. (1983). A Theory and Methodology of Inductive Learning. In R.S. Michalski, J.G. Carbonell, and T.M. Mitchell (Eds.), Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach (pp. 83–129). Palo Alto: Tioga Publishing.
Michalski, R.S. (to appear). NATURAL INDUCTION: A Theory, Methodology and Applications to Knowledge ining and Pattern Discovery. Reports of the Machine Learning and Inference Laboratory, George Mason University.
Piatetsky-Shapiro, G. (1991). Discovery, Analysis, and Presentation of Strong Rules. In G. Piatetsky-Shapiro and W. Frawley (Eds.), Knowledge Discovery in Databases (pp. 229–248). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Quinlan, J.R. (1986). Induction of Decision Trees, Machine Learning, 1, 81–106.
Zhang, J. and Michalski, R.S. (1989). Rule Optimization via SG-TRUNC Method. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Working Session on Learning, Montpellier (pp. 251–262).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaufman, K.A., Michalski, R.S. An Adjustable Description Quality Measure for Pattern Discovery Using the AQ Methodology. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 14, 199–216 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008787919756
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008787919756