By Topic

Comparing Accuracies of Rule Evaluation Models to Determine Human Criteria on Evaluated Rule Sets

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Hidenao Abe ; Shimane Univ., Matsue ; Shusaku Tsumoto

In data mining post-processing, rule selection using objective rule evaluation indices is one of a useful method to find out valuable knowledge from mined patterns. However, the relationship between an index value and experts' criteria has never been clarified. In this study, we have compared the accuracies of classification learning algorithms for datasets with randomized class distributions and real human evaluations. As a method to determine the relationship, we used rule evaluation models, which are learned from a dataset consisting of objective rule evaluation indices and evaluation labels for each rule. Then, the results show that accuracies of classification learning algorithms with/without criteria of human experts are different on a balanced randomized class distribution. With regarding to the results, we can consider about a way to distinguish randomly evaluated rules using the accuracies of multiple learning algorithms.

Published in:

2008 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops

Date of Conference:

15-19 Dec. 2008