On mining summaries by objective measures of interestingness

Machine Learning

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 175-198

  Zbidi, Naim ^a   Faiz, Sami ^b   Limam, Mohamed ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TUNIS   (Tunisia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CARTHAGE   (Tunisia)

Author keywords

Association rules; Data mining; Diversity measures

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; THEOREM PROVING;

ASSOCIATION RULES; DIVERSITY MEASURES; MATHEMATICAL PROOFS;

DATA MINING;

EID: 33644977630     PISSN: 08856125     EISSN: 15730565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10994-005-5066-8     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Carter, C. L., & Hamilton, H. J. (1995a). Fast, incremental generalization and regeneralization for knowledge discovery from large databases. In Proceedings of the Eighth Florida Artificial Intelligence Symposium. (pp. 319-323), Melbourne, Florida.
2. Carter, C. L., & Hamilton, H. J. (1995b). Performance evaluation of attribute-oriented algorithms for knowledge discovery from databases. In Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI'95). (pp. 486-489), Washington, D.C.
3. Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1991). Transfer principles and a classification of concentration measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS), 42:7, 479-489.
4. Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2001). data mining: Concepts and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
5. Hilderman, R. J., & Hamilton, H. J. (1999). Heuristic measures of interestingness. In Proceedings of the Third European Conference on the Principles of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (PKDD'99). (pp. 232-241), Prague, Czech Republic.
6. Hilderman, R. J., & Hamilton, H. J. (2000). Principles for mining summaries using objective measures of interestingness. In Proceedings of the Twelfth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI'00). (pp. 72-81), Vancouver, Canada.
7. Hilderman, R. J., & Hamilton, H. J. (2001). Evaluation of interestingness measures for ranking discovered knowledge. Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences, 2035, 247-259.
8. Hilderman, R. J., Hamilton, H. J., & Barber, B. (1999a). Ranking the interestingness of summaries from data mining systems. In Proceedings of the 12th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Symposium (FLAIRS'99), (pp. 100-106), Orlando, U.S.A..
9. Hilderman, R. J., Hamilton, H. J., & Cercone, N. (1999b). Data mining in large databases using domain generalization graphs. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 13:3, 195-234.
10. Hill, M. O. (1973). Diversity and evenness: A unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology, 54, 427-432.
11. Rae, D. W., & Taylor, M. (1970). The Analysis of Political Cleavages. New Haven: Yale University Press.
12. Silberschatz, A., & Tuzhilin, A. (1995). On objective measures of interestingness in knowledge discovery. In Proceedings of The First International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'95). (pp. 275-281), Montreal, Canada.
13. Silberschatz, A., & Tuzhilin, A. (1996). What makes patterns interesting in knowledge discovery. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Special Issue on Data Mining, 5:6, 970-974.