Association rule Interestingness: Measure and statistical validation

Studies in Computational Intelligence

Volumn 43, Issue , 2007, Pages 251-275

  Lallich, Stephane ^a   Teytaud, Olivier ^b   Prudhomme, Elie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LUMIÈRE LYON 2   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

Author keywords

Association rules; False discoveries; Interestingness measures; Measure properties; Multiple testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846419833     PISSN: 1860949X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-44918-8_11     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. R. Agrawal, T. Imielinski, and A.N. Swami. Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In P. Buneman and S. Jajodia, editors, ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data, pages 207-216, 1993.
2. R. Agrawal and R. Srikant. Fast algorithms for mining association rules. In J.B. Bocca, M. Jarke, and C. Zaniolo, editors, Proceedings of the 20th Very Large Data Bases Conference, pages 487-499. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.
3. J. Azé and Y. Kodratoff. A study of the effect of noisy data in rule extraction systems. In Sixteenth European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, volume 2, pages 781-786, 2002.
4. Y. Benjamini and Y. Hochberg. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc., B, 57:289-300, 1995.
5. Y. Benjamini and W. Liu. A step-down multiple-hypothesis procedure that controls the false discovery rate under independance. J. Stat. Planng Inf., 82:163-170, 1999.
6. C.L. Blake and C.J. Merz. UCI repository of machine learning databases. http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mlearn/MLRepository.html, 1998.
7. J. Blanchard, F. Guillet, H. Briand, and R. Gras. Assessing the interestingness of rules with a probabilistic measure of deviation from equilibrium. In ASMDA'05, pages 191-200, 2005.
8. J. Blanchard, P. Kuntz, F. Guillet, and R. Gras. Mesure de la qualité des rêgles d'association par l'intensité d'implication entropique. Mesures de Qualité pour la Fouille de Données, (RNTI-E-1):33-45, 2004.
9. C. Borgelt and R. Kruse. Induction of association rules: Apriori implementation. In 15th Conf. on Computational Statistics, 2002.
10. S. Brin, R. Motwani, and C. Silverstein. Beyond market baskets: generalizing association rules to correlations. In ACM SIGMOD/PODS'97, pages 265-276, 1997.
11. S. Brin, R. Motwani, J.D. Ullman, and S. Tsur. Dynamic itemset counting and implication rules for market basket data. In Joan Peckham, editor, ACM SIGMOD 1997 Int. Conf. on Management of Data, pages 255-264, 1997.
12. B. Efron. Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jacknkife. Annals of statistics, 7:1-26, 1979.
13. J.-G. Ganascia. Deriving the learning bias from rule properties. Machine intelligence, 12:151-167, 1991.
14. Y. Ge, S. Dudoit, and T.P. Speed. Resampling-based multiple testing for microarray data analysis. Tech. rep. 663, Univ. of California, Berkeley, 2003.
15. E. Giné and J. Zinn. Bootstrapping general empirical measures. Annals of probability, 18:851-869, 1984.
16. R. Gras. Contribution à l'étude expérimentale et à l'analyse de certaines acquisitions cognitives et de certains objectifs didactiques en mathématiques. PhD thesis, Université de Rennes I, 1979.
17. R. Gras, R. Couturier, M. Bernadet, J. Blanchard, H. Briand, F. Guillet, P. Kuntz, R. Lehn, and P. Peter. Quelques critéres pour une mesure de qualité de règles d'association - un exemple: L'intensité d'implication. Mesures de Qualité pour la Fouille de Données, (RNTI-E-1), 2004.
18. R. Gras, P. Kuntz, R. Couturier, and F. Guillet. Une version entropique de l'intensité d'implication pour les corpus volumineux. EGC 2001, 1(1-2):69-80, 2001.
19. R. Gras and A. Lahrer. L'implication statistique: Une nouvelle méthode d'analyse des données. Math. Inf. et Sc. Hum., 120:5-31, 1993.
20. F. Guillet. Mesure de la qualité des connaissances en ECD. Tutoriel 4e Conference Extraction et Gestion des Connaissances, EGC'04, 2004.
21. P. Hajek, I. Havel, and M. Chytil. The guha method of automatic hypotheses determination. Computing, (1):293-308, 1966.
22. P. Hajek and J. Rauch. Logics and statistics for association rules and beyond. Tutorial PKDD'99, 1999.
23. R.J. Hilderman and H.J. Hamilton. Evaluation of interestingness measures for ranking discovered knowledge. LNCS, 2035:247-259, 2001.
24. S. Holm. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. J. Statistic., 6:65-70, 1979.
25. H. Jeffreys. Some test of significance treated by theory of probability. In Proc. Of the Cambridge Phil. Soc., pages 203-222, 1935.
26. M. Kamber and R. Shingal. Evaluating the interestingness of characteristic rules. In Proceedings of KDD'96, pages 263-266, 1996.
27. Yves Kodratoff. Quelques contraintes symboliques sur le numérique en ECD et en ECT. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2000.
28. S. Lallich. Mesure et validation en extraction des connaissances à partir des données. Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches - Université Lyon 2, 2002.
29. S. Lallich, E. Prudhomme, and O. Teytaud. Contrôle du risque multiple en sélection de règles d'association significatives. RNTI-E-2, 2:305-316, 2004.
30. S. Lallich and O. Teytaud. Évaluation et validation de l'intérêt des régles d'association. Mesures de Qualité pour la Fouille de Données, (RNTI-E-1):193-217, 2004.
31. S. Lallich, B. Vaillant, and P. Lenca. Parametrised measures for the evaluation of association rule interestingness. In Proc. of ASMDA'05, pages 220-229, 2005.
32. P. Lenca, P. Meyer, B. Vaillant, P. Picouet, and S. Lallich. Évaluation et analyse multicritère des mesures de qualitè des règles d'association. Mesures de Qualité pour la Fouille de Données, (RNTI-E-1):219-246, 2004.
33. I. Lerman. Comparing partitions, mathematical and statistical aspects. Classification and Related Methods of Data Analysis, pages 121-131, 1988.
34. I.C. Lerman and J. Azé. Indice probabiliste discriminant de vraisemblance du lien pour des données volumineuses. Mesures de Qualité pour la Fouille de Données, (RNTI-E-1):69-94, 2004.
35. I.C. Lerman, R. Gras, and H. Rostam. Elaboration d'un indice d'implication pour les données binaires, i et ii. Mathématiques et Sciences Humaines, (74, 75):5-35, 5-47, 1981.
36. J. Loevinger. A systemic approach to the construction and evaluation of tests of ability. Psychological monographs, 61(4), 1947.
37. H. Mannila, H. Toivonen, and A.I. Verkamo. Efficient algorithms for discovering association rules. In Proc. AAAI'94 Workshop Knowledge Discovery in Databases (KDD'94), pages 181-192, 1994.
38. N. Meggido and R. Srikant. Discovering predictive association rules. Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD-98), pages 274-278, 1998.
39. G. Piatetsky-Shapiro. Discovery, analysis and presentation of strong rules. In Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pages 229-248. AAAI/MIT Press, 1991.
40. R. Rakotomalala. Tanagra. http://eric.univ-lyon2.fr/~ricco/tanagra, 2003.
41. P. F. Russel and T. R. Rao. On habitat and association of species of anopheline larvae in south-eastern Madras. J. Malar. Inst. India, (3):153-178, 1940.
42. M. Sebag and M. Schoenauer. Generation of rules with certainty and confidence factors from incomplete and incoherent learning bases. In J. Boose, B. Gaines, and M. Linster, editors, Proc. of EKAW'88, pages 28-1 - 28-20. 1988.
43. J. D. Storey. A direct approach to false discovery rates. J. R. Statisc. Soc., Series B, 64:479-498, 2002.
44. P.-N. Tan, V. Kumar, and J. Srivastava. Selecting the right interestingness measure for association patterns. In Eighth ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. on KDD, pages 32-41, 2002.
45. O. Teytaud and S. Lallich. Bornes uniformes en extraction de règles d'association. In CAp'01, pages 133-148, 2001.
46. B. Vaillant, P. Picouet, and P. Lenca. An extensible platform for rule quality measure benchmarking. In R. Bisdorff, editor, HCP'2003, pages 187-191, 2003.
47. A. Van Der Vaart and J.A. Wellner. Weak Convergence and Empirical Processes. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer-Verlag Publishers, 1996.
48. T. Zhang. Association rules. In Proceedings of PAKDD 2000, volume 1805 of LNCS, pages 245-256. Springer, 2000.