Results 1  10
of
1,336
Mining Association Rules between Sets of Items in Large Databases
 IN: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1993 ACM SIGMOD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT OF DATA, WASHINGTON DC (USA
, 1993
"... We are given a large database of customer transactions. Each transaction consists of items purchased by a customer in a visit. We present an efficient algorithm that generates all significant association rules between items in the database. The algorithm incorporates buffer management and novel esti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2418 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We are given a large database of customer transactions. Each transaction consists of items purchased by a customer in a visit. We present an efficient algorithm that generates all significant association rules between items in the database. The algorithm incorporates buffer management and novel estimation and pruning techniques. We also present results of applying this algorithm to sales data obtained from a large retailing company, which shows the effectiveness of the algorithm.
The capacity of wireless networks
 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY
, 2000
"... When n identical randomly located nodes, each capable of transmitting at bits per second and using a fixed range, form a wireless network, the throughput @ A obtainable by each node for a randomly chosen destination is 2 bits per second under a noninterference protocol. If the nodes are optimally p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2220 (32 self)
 Add to MetaCart
When n identical randomly located nodes, each capable of transmitting at bits per second and using a fixed range, form a wireless network, the throughput @ A obtainable by each node for a randomly chosen destination is 2 bits per second under a noninterference protocol. If the nodes are optimally placed in a disk of unit area, traffic patterns are optimally assigned, and each transmission’s range is optimally chosen, the bit–distance product that can be transported by the network per second is 2 @ A bitmeters per second. Thus even under optimal circumstances, the throughput is only 2 bits per second for each node for a destination nonvanishingly far away. Similar results also hold under an alternate physical model where a required signaltointerference ratio is specified for successful receptions. Fundamentally, it is the need for every node all over the domain to share whatever portion of the channel it is utilizing with nodes in its local neighborhood that is the reason for the constriction in capacity. Splitting the channel into several subchannels does not change any of the results. Some implications may be worth considering by designers. Since the throughput furnished to each user diminishes to zero as the number of users is increased, perhaps networks connecting smaller numbers of users, or featuring connections mostly with nearby neighbors, may be more likely to be find acceptance.
Reinforcement learning: a survey
 Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
, 1996
"... This paper surveys the field of reinforcement learning from a computerscience perspective. It is written to be accessible to researchers familiar with machine learning. Both the historical basis of the field and a broad selection of current work are summarized. Reinforcement learning is the problem ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1298 (23 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper surveys the field of reinforcement learning from a computerscience perspective. It is written to be accessible to researchers familiar with machine learning. Both the historical basis of the field and a broad selection of current work are summarized. Reinforcement learning is the problem faced by an agent that learns behavior through trialanderror interactions with a dynamic environment. The work described here has a resemblance to work in psychology, but differs considerably in the details and in the use of the word "reinforcement." The paper discusses central issues of reinforcement learning, including trading off exploration and exploitation, establishing the foundations of the field via Markov decision theory, learning from delayed reinforcement, constructing empirical models to accelerate learning, making use of generalization and hierarchy, and coping with hidden state. It concludes with a survey of some implemented systems and an assessment of the practical utility of current methods for reinforcement learning.
Learning Stochastic Logic Programs
, 2000
"... Stochastic Logic Programs (SLPs) have been shown to be a generalisation of Hidden Markov Models (HMMs), stochastic contextfree grammars, and directed Bayes' nets. A stochastic logic program consists of a set of labelled clauses p:C where p is in the interval [0,1] and C is a firstorder range ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1057 (71 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Stochastic Logic Programs (SLPs) have been shown to be a generalisation of Hidden Markov Models (HMMs), stochastic contextfree grammars, and directed Bayes' nets. A stochastic logic program consists of a set of labelled clauses p:C where p is in the interval [0,1] and C is a firstorder rangerestricted definite clause. This paper summarises the syntax, distributional semantics and proof techniques for SLPs and then discusses how a standard Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) system, Progol, has been modied to support learning of SLPs. The resulting system 1) nds an SLP with uniform probability labels on each definition and nearmaximal Bayes posterior probability and then 2) alters the probability labels to further increase the posterior probability. Stage 1) is implemented within CProgol4.5, which differs from previous versions of Progol by allowing userdefined evaluation functions written in Prolog. It is shown that maximising the Bayesian posterior function involves nding SLPs with short derivations of the examples. Search pruning with the Bayesian evaluation function is carried out in the same way as in previous versions of CProgol. The system is demonstrated with worked examples involving the learning of probability distributions over sequences as well as the learning of simple forms of uncertain knowledge.
Instancebased learning algorithms
 Machine Learning
, 1991
"... Abstract. Storing and using specific instances improves the performance of several supervised learning algorithms. These include algorithms that learn decision trees, classification rules, and distributed networks. However, no investigation has analyzed algorithms that use only specific instances to ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1053 (18 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Storing and using specific instances improves the performance of several supervised learning algorithms. These include algorithms that learn decision trees, classification rules, and distributed networks. However, no investigation has analyzed algorithms that use only specific instances to solve incremental learning tasks. In this paper, we describe a framework and methodology, called instancebased learning, that generates classification predictions using only specific instances. Instancebased learning algorithms do not maintain a set of abstractions derived from specific instances. This approach extends the nearest neighbor algorithm, which has large storage requirements. We describe how storage requirements can be significantly reduced with, at most, minor sacrifices in learning rate and classification accuracy. While the storagereducing algorithm performs well on several realworld databases, its performance degrades rapidly with the level of attribute noise in training instances. Therefore, we extended it with a significance test to distinguish noisy instances. This extended algorithm's performance degrades gracefully with increasing noise levels and compares favorably with a noisetolerant decision tree algorithm.
Learning quickly when irrelevant attributes abound: A new linearthreshold algorithm
 Machine Learning
, 1988
"... learning Boolean functions, linearthreshold algorithms Abstract. Valiant (1984) and others have studied the problem of learning various classes of Boolean functions from examples. Here we discuss incremental learning of these functions. We consider a setting in which the learner responds to each ex ..."
Abstract

Cited by 680 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
learning Boolean functions, linearthreshold algorithms Abstract. Valiant (1984) and others have studied the problem of learning various classes of Boolean functions from examples. Here we discuss incremental learning of these functions. We consider a setting in which the learner responds to each example according to a current hypothesis. Then the learner updates the hypothesis, if necessary, based on the correct classification of the example. One natural measure of the quality of learning in this setting is the number of mistakes the learner makes. For suitable classes of functions, learning algorithms are available that make a bounded number of mistakes, with the bound independent of the number of examples seen by the learner. We present one such algorithm that learns disjunctive Boolean functions, along with variants for learning other classes of Boolean functions. The basic method can be expressed as a linearthreshold algorithm. A primary advantage of this algorithm is that the number of mistakes grows only logarithmically with the number of irrelevant attributes in the examples. At the same time, the algorithm is computationally efficient in both time and space. 1.
Solving multiclass learning problems via errorcorrecting output codes
 Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
, 1995
"... Multiclass learning problems involve nding a de nition for an unknown function f(x) whose range is a discrete set containing k>2values (i.e., k \classes"). The de nition is acquired by studying collections of training examples of the form hx i;f(x i)i. Existing approaches to multiclass learning ..."
Abstract

Cited by 564 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Multiclass learning problems involve nding a de nition for an unknown function f(x) whose range is a discrete set containing k>2values (i.e., k \classes"). The de nition is acquired by studying collections of training examples of the form hx i;f(x i)i. Existing approaches to multiclass learning problems include direct application of multiclass algorithms such as the decisiontree algorithms C4.5 and CART, application of binary concept learning algorithms to learn individual binary functions for each of the k classes, and application of binary concept learning algorithms with distributed output representations. This paper compares these three approaches to a new technique in which errorcorrecting codes are employed as a distributed output representation. We show that these output representations improve the generalization performance of both C4.5 and backpropagation on a wide range of multiclass learning tasks. We also demonstrate that this approach is robust with respect to changes in the size of the training sample, the assignment of distributed representations to particular classes, and the application of over tting avoidance techniques such as decisiontree pruning. Finally,we show thatlike the other methodsthe errorcorrecting code technique can provide reliable class probability estimates. Taken together, these results demonstrate that errorcorrecting output codes provide a generalpurpose method for improving the performance of inductive learning programs on multiclass problems. 1.
Stacked generalization
 Neural Networks
, 1992
"... Abstract: This paper introduces stacked generalization, a scheme for minimizing the generalization error rate of one or more generalizers. Stacked generalization works by deducing the biases of the generalizer(s) with respect to a provided learning set. This deduction proceeds by generalizing in a s ..."
Abstract

Cited by 550 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract: This paper introduces stacked generalization, a scheme for minimizing the generalization error rate of one or more generalizers. Stacked generalization works by deducing the biases of the generalizer(s) with respect to a provided learning set. This deduction proceeds by generalizing in a second space whose inputs are (for example) the guesses of the original generalizers when taught with part of the learning set and trying to guess the rest of it, and whose output is (for example) the correct guess. When used with multiple generalizers, stacked generalization can be seen as a more sophisticated version of crossvalidation, exploiting a strategy more sophisticated than crossvalidation’s crude winnertakesall for combining the individual generalizers. When used with a single generalizer, stacked generalization is a scheme for estimating (and then correcting for) the error of a generalizer which has been trained on a particular learning set and then asked a particular question. After introducing stacked generalization and justifying its use, this paper presents two numerical experiments. The first demonstrates how stacked generalization improves upon a set of separate generalizers for the NETtalk task of translating text to phonemes. The second demonstrates how stacked generalization improves the performance of a single surfacefitter. With the other experimental evidence in the literature, the usual arguments supporting crossvalidation, and the abstract justifications presented in this paper, the conclusion is that for almost any realworld generalization problem one should use some version of stacked generalization to minimize the generalization error rate. This paper ends by discussing some of the variations of stacked generalization, and how it touches on other fields like chaos theory. Key Words: generalization and induction, combining generalizers, learning set preprocessing, crossvalidation, error estimation and correction.
Wrapper Induction for Information Extraction
, 1997
"... The Internet presents numerous sources of useful informationtelephone directories, product catalogs, stock quotes, weather forecasts, etc. Recently, many systems have been built that automatically gather and manipulate such information on a user's behalf. However, these resources are usually form ..."
Abstract

Cited by 519 (30 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The Internet presents numerous sources of useful informationtelephone directories, product catalogs, stock quotes, weather forecasts, etc. Recently, many systems have been built that automatically gather and manipulate such information on a user's behalf. However, these resources are usually formatted for use by people (e.g., the relevant content is embedded in HTML pages), so extracting their content is difficult. Wrappers are often used for this purpose. A wrapper is a procedure for extracting a particular resource's content. Unfortunately, handcoding wrappers is tedious. We introduce wrapper induction, a technique for automatically constructing wrappers. Our techniques can be described in terms of three main contributions. First, we pose the problem of wrapper construction as one of inductive learn...