On comparing classifiers: Pitfalls to avoid and a recommended approach

Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 317-328

  Salzberg, Steven L ^a,b  

^a Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Classification; Comparative studies; Statistical methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 27144463192     PISSN: 13845810     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1009752403260     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Aha, D. Generalizing from case studies: A case study. In Proc. Ninth Intl. Workshop on Machine Learning, pages 1-10, San Mateo, CA, 1992. Morgan Kaufmann.
2. Cochran, W. and Cox, G. Experimental Designs. Wiley, 2nd edition, 1957.
3. Cohen, P.R. and Jensen, D. Overfitting explained. In Prelim. Papers Sixth Intl. Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 115-122, January 1997.
4. Denton, F. Data mining as an industry. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67:124-127, 1985.
5. Dietterich, T. Statistical tests for comparing supervised learning algorithms. Technical report, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 1996.
6. Everitt, B. The Analysis of Contingency Tables. Chapman and Hall, London., 1977.
7. Fayyad, U.M. and Irani, K.B. Multi-interval discretization of continuous valued attributes for classification learning. In Proc. 13th Intl. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1022-1027, Chambery, France, 1993. Morgan Kaufmann.
8. Feelders, A. and Verkooijen, W. Which method learns most from the data? In Prelim. Papers Fifth Intl. Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 219-225, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 1995.
9. Flexer, A. Statistical evaluation of neural network experiments: Minimum requirements and current practice. In R. Trappl, editor, Cybernetics and Systems '96: Proc. 13th European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Res., pages 1005-1008. Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies, 1996.